From: tgpedersen
Message: 46818
Date: 2006-12-29
>is odd,
>
> It is supposedly a difficult problem to reconcile the middle forms
> in *-r, eg Latin -tur, -ntur, with those without, eg Greek primary
> -tai; -ntai; secondary -to; -nto. Also, the -o of the r-less forms
> but it seems right, somehow, before the -r.Boutkan:
>
> So maybe we should be looking for somthing which alternates *-to, *-tor?
>
> from Burrow: The Sanskrit Language
> "In addition to the ordinary future Sanskrit created a second or
> periphrastic future based on the agent nouns in -tar. In the third
> person the nom. sg., du. and pl. of such nouns functions as the
> second future without any addition : kartá:, kartá:rau, kartá:ras.
> In the first and second persons forms of the verb 'to be' are added
> to the nom. sg. of agent noun, in the dual and plural as well as in
> the singular : kartá:smi, kartá:si; kartá:svas ; kartá:smas. The
> function of the second future is to express the future in connection
> with some specified time : s´vó vras.t.á: 'it will rain tomorrow',
> etc. This type of future first begins to appear in the Bra:hman.a
> period, and its use continues later, though it is never anything
> like as common as the first future. There was created also a
> corresponding middle, which, however, is exceedingly rare, since it
> appears to have been current in the living language for only a very
> limited period. The special middle forms, which exist only for the
> first and second persons, are as follows: S. 1 kartá:he, 2 kartá:se,
> D. 1 kartá:svahe, 2 kartá:sa:the, P. 1 kartá:smahe, 2 kartá:dhve."
>
> Is there a connection here? One further connection: The agent noun
> suffix seems capable of losing the *-t-, and may be involved in
> dectic pronouns: 'there', Dutch 'er'.