Perfect, Latin 1st conj, Tocharian pret. I

Latin 1st conj. perf.
ama:vi:
ama:visti:
ama:vi:t
ama:vimus
ama:vistis
ama:ve:runt, ama:ve:re

abbreviated forms (traditionally)
ama:vi:
ama:sti:
ama:vi:t
ama:vimus
ama:stis
ama:runt

and similarly in the 2nd and 4th conjugations

Tocharian B pret. I
kautäwa
kautästa
kauta
kauta:m(o)
kauta:s(o)
kauta:re

and similarly for pret. III

It seems to me the Tocharian preterite is closer to the Latin
supposed abbreviated forms that to the 'proper' long forms.
Perhaps the 'abbreviated forms' are the original ones in Latin?


BTW the Latin 3rd conjugation, the only one which doesn't have
'abbreviated' forms on the other hand contains many supposed
PIE s-aorists, eg.
dic-s-i: (dixi:)
dic-s-isti:
dic-s-i:t
dic-s-imus
dic-s-istis
dic-s-e:runt

cf Tocharian B pret III
prekwa
prekasta
preksa
prekam
prekas
prekar

in other words, Latin might have generalized from a sigmatic 3rd sg,
and not taken over the s-perfects from a sigmatic aorist, as the
traditional explanation is?


Torsten