Re: PIE Punctual and Durative

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Ryan" <proto-language@...>
wrote:

>
> It is my view that earliest PIE had two verbal stems:
>
> punctual: *bhér-
> durative: *bheré-
>
> both derived from *bhere-.
>
> I presume that many on the list would disagree.

We might contend your reasons for maintaining that view, if we knew
what they were.

> What I am therefore interested in finding out is if anyone on the
> list agrees or disagrees with the following statement:

Ah, being tactical.

> 1) PIE had any process (at least, one, excepting lexical) for

distinguishing punctual and durative verbal employment.

I think verb stems could be extended with an -s- to form what I would
call a subitive stem (for want of better term), which was used to
build some aorist and future forms. It was made by falsely dividing a
2sg injunctive in -si as a stem in -s- plus imp2sg ending -ei/-i.
Because of the natural semantics of commands, the stem came to have
inceptive meaning. The -s- was then back-constructed into the aorist
subjunctive. Since 3sg pret was originally endingless, the 'subitive'
stem in -s- was used there as is, or as a 3sg future. Later full
paradigms were constructed around this stem.

> Secondarily, if it did, what the function of this distinction was
> semantically.

The function of distinguishing between durative and punctual stems was
to distinguish between durative and punctual situations.

> All comments will be welcomed.

Warmly.


Torsten