Re: *-t-, put

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Jens Elmegård Rasmussen <elme@...> wrote:

>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@> wrote:
>
> > Now this would explain why the Germanic weak preterite has present
> > endings *except* for the 3sg. How would you explain that fact with
> > your and/or the traditional model?
>
> Hold it, this is not a correct point of departure.

Yes, I think I was a little hasty.

> I don't see the primary endings in the other persons. The 1.2.3.sg
> are generally reconstructed as *-do:m, *-de:s (or *-do:s), *-de:,
> i.e. all with secondary endings;

I assume from the hyphens you mean the weak verbs.
I can't see why they do that, it's
Gothic -da, -de:s, -da
OE -de, -des(t), -de
OFr -de, ?, -de
OS -da, -des/-das/-dos, -da
or -ta ...
OHG -ta, -to:s(t), -ta
ON -ða, -ðir, -ði

so presumably that reconstruction is based on ON alone (but those
ending are the same in the -r- preterites, from s-aorists, so are they
relevant?), since in all other Germ. languages the pret., 1sg = 3sg,
and why would a language replace the 3sg with its 1sg?

> and the 1.2.3.pl have -dum, -duT, -dun just like
> the strong preterite.

> Therefore, your elaborate original structures
> seem to have been designed to explain something that isn't there.
> Also the o-forms point to a preterital basis, for 1sg *-do:m has
> replaced *-de:m on the analogy of the thematic aorist (or imperfect)
> in *-o-m as opposed to 3sg *-e-t.

Are we talking weak endings or th "do" verb here?

> The 2sg variant *-do:s will be due to secondary influence from the
> 1sg.

> I do not see how any of this could be based on old presents.

I didn't declare the non-3sg forms to be presents. I said they took
their endings. Cf. pret. 2sg OHG nami, German nahmst

This is the verb 'doon' in modern Platt as presented in 'Niederdeutsch
an Volkshochschulen':
ik do, du deist, he deit, wi, ji, se doot

I think the sg. is the closest to the original verb which would have
been something like
*do:mi, *de:i, *de:i
later 'fixed' to
*do:m, *de:is(t), *de:it

Now that seems reasonable as a starting point for the ON endings
(while being also similar to aorist endings), but in East and West
Germanic, the 3sg obviously doesn't fit in.


Torsten