Re: PIE meaning of the Germanic dental preterit

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...> wrote:

>
> On 2008-02-26 00:46, alexandru_mg3 wrote:
>
> > Is the origin of Germanic dental preterit the PIE dheh1- 'to set,

to

> > place, to make, to do' ?
> >
> > If so, this means that initially -dheh1 was a deitic particle

having

> > his own meaning.
>
> What seems to occur in the dental preterite is the old reduplicated
> imperfect of *dHeh1-, namely *dHi-dHéh1-t/*dHé-dH(h1)-n.t > Gmc.
> *ðiðe:(ð)/*ðe:ðun(ð):
>
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/49361
>
> > I would like to ask what could be the original meaning of this

particle

> > <Verb> + <dHeh1> ?
>
> There is no "particle" here, but a common-or-garden periphrastic
> construction consisting of a past participle and an auxiliary verb:
>
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/49367
>
> Piotr

With all my respect for Jens, I think that there is no -t or -nt
*dHi-dHéh1-t/*dHé-dH(h1)-n.t

See Jassanof:

"
1) On the Germanic side, the discovery in 1963 of the Runic 3 sg.
talgidai (Nøvling, c. 200), which rules out the traditional
reconstruction of the 3 sg. ending as PGmc. *-de: < *-de:t < PIE *-
dheh1-t;
"

Unfortunately 'I found' only the Abstract:
http://wings.buffalo.edu/org/gggaas/GLAC9/PlenaryJayJasanoffGLAC9Abstr
act.pdf

If this inscription exists, this is a fact, not an interpretation or
a model.

And if so, also the idea of reduplication disappeared too.

Marius