Re: [tied] Re: Subjunctive and Thematic Present

On 2006-08-16 18:26, tgpedersen wrote:

>> 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> ?

Oops, I do, of course.

>> 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)?

Yes, it's an interesting parallel. In Slavic, the 2/3sg. fell together
for phonological reasons before the extension of "endingless" aorists
with *-t-, which motivated the spread of the 3sg. extension to the 2sg.
as well. In Hittite, the mechanism must have been somewhat different,
since the 2sg. -s (still preserved in Old Hittite) and the 3sg. -t had
not merged phonologically. Both persons acquired the same form also in
the preterite of the hi-conjugation (as -s or -sta) and in the preterite
middle.

Piotr