From: tgpedersen
Message: 48501
Date: 2007-05-09
>The Italian/Sicilian/Portuguese connection can't be. The -st- part is
> >>and can't be newly
> >>constructed from Latin fu-; the -st- points to a language
> >>with -dh + t- > -st-, where Latin (Germanic, Celtic)
> >>has > -ss-.
> >
> >It's quite obviously the preterite stem <fus-> plus the normal
> >past participle suffix <-t->, just like <fãcu> 'he did' :
> ><fãcut> 'done'.
> >
> Romanian has two variants of this tense, which is called
> the simple perfect:
>
> (1) fui, fu$i, fu, fùrãm, fùrãtzi, fùrã
> (2) fuséi, fusé$i, fùse, fùserãm, fùserãtzi, fùserã
>
> The past perfect tense:
> fusésem, fusése$i, fusése, fuséserãm, fuséserãtzi, fuséserã
> (regional: fusásãm, fusásã$i, fusásã, fusásãrãm, fusásãrãtzi, fusásãrã)
> The imperfect tense: erám, erái, erá, erám, erátzi, eráu)
>
> Can't fost be compared with the Italian historic past tense
> and the subjunctive? fui, fosti, fu, fummo, foste, furono.
> And Sicilian preterite fusti & fùstivu? Portuguese foste &
> fostes?
>
> Foste/fosti are also continuations of the Latin forms: fui,
> fuisti, fuit, fuimus, fuistis, fuerunt.
>