Re: Subjunctive and Thematic Present

> Hittite has done as much restructuring as the other
> branches. Having developed a tense-based verb system
> and having abandoned aspect distinctions, it could
> conjugate any verb in the present or the preterite
> (unlike PIE), marking _both_ of them. It partly
> recycled the PIE "present continuous" as the present
> and used (modified) "secondary" endings for the preterite,
> but would you say that there is a markedness
> contrast e.g. between <wek-mi, wek-ti, wek-zi>

You mean <wek-mi, wek-si, wek-zi> ?

> and <wek-un, wek-ta, wek-ta>?

Has anybody pointed out the similarity of the latter
to Ch.Sl. aorist (in some verbs)
<-sU (< *-som), -tU, -tU> (minus the -s- of the
s-aorist stem, of course)?


Torsten