Re: [tied] Thematic root aorist

On 2006-07-14 23:18, Edgard Bikelis wrote:

> Hi!
>
> Is there any PIE root that is by itself a thematic root
> aorist/punctual, in the same way as *bher- is durative?
>
> The best example I did find for now is from Vedic ávidam / ávidas /
> ávidat, but this verb seems to be from our old friend *weyd-. If so,
> from where came the -n- from the present vindá:mi / vindási / vindáti?
> Is that the nasal infix from the seventh class, that went to

the weak

> grade as it lost the accent for the thematic vowel, or am I just messing
> up everything ; )?

The history of the problem is one of gradual elimination. There are
_very_ few if any simple thematic aorists that are reconstructible for
PIE. All such aorists seem to have originated as athematic aorist
subjunctives converted into indicatives or old middles converted into
actives. The best examples of relatively old simple thematic aorist are
*h1ludH-é/ó- and *wid-é/ó-, the latter less secure than it used to be,
since athematic *weid-/*wid- (secondarily thematised) is suggested by
Lat. vi:dit vs. Gk eîde, Skt. ávidat. Lat. vi:dit was once regarded as a
reflex of perf. *wóide, but that's unlikely given its meaning ('saw,
perceived' etc., never 'knows').

Piotr
_______________

Why did athematic aorist subjunctives have zero grade?  Shouldn't they have the forms of the s-aorist or the root aorist (i.e. lengthened grade or full grade (or did the root aorist have zero grade in the dual and plural?)) plus the subjunctive endings?  And why would middles (I assume from the imperfect?) have zero grade?
I'm just a little confused by these ideas of the origin of the thematic root aorist.  Actually, I've just realized I'm not sure I understand what is meant by "thematic root aorist" -- I originally thought he meant aorists that have the thematic vowel before the endings, but maybe he means something else?  Perhaps you could clarify on this matter for me.

Andrew