Re: PIE meaning of the Germanic dental preterit

On 2008-02-27 18:22, alexandru_mg3 wrote:

> "Crow have wings and can fly, like storks, and this means that the
> their common ancestor was a flier bird " (sic! :))

No, it doesn't follow (even if it's true). You have to prove that wings
and other flight-related features in crows and stork are homologous.

> 0. There was a Common Language named PIE (-> so already from here you
> story with 'bats and birds' doesn't fit)
>
> 1. There were already in PIE verbal construction in -dH(e)h1- this is
> the starting point. -dH(e)h1- was also used for noun and adjectival
> constructions too.

There were compounds with *dHeh1-, which is not the same as "constructions".

> 2. There was already in PIE periphrastic verbal constructions that
> used some <key> verbs like 'bHuh-' 'dHeh1-' etc...as a distinct
> marker

I don't think you can prove it. The fact that there are similar
constructions in various languages is more likely due to independent
innovations, since the constructuiona are different in detail.

> 3. Reduplication was used already in PIE times for Morphological
> Functionalities even quite for teh definition of Verbal Aspects (so
> the concept of 'morphological reduplication' was used already in PIE)

I'm not quite sure I understand what you mean, but if you mean simply
that reduplication was a morphological device in PIE, I of course agree.

> If you have another opinion on 1 to 3 is your turn now...
>
> Of course, there was no 'Weak-Preterite' in PIE that is a Later
> Innovation of Germanic => but this construction is based on 1-3 :
>
> 1-3 was coagulated Only in Germanic

You've lost me here, I'm afraid. What do you mean by "coagulated"?

> but the Dental Preterit (together
> with other Germanic Constructiosn) has appeared based on some
> previous PIE periphrastic verbal constructions

All the elements are inherited. The combination is new. Look here,
Marius: why not present your own scenario of the origin of the dental
preterite?

Piotr