Re: PIE meaning of the Germanic dental preterit

On Mon, 03 Mar 2008 23:37:42 -0000, "alexandru_mg3"
<alexandru_mg3@...> wrote:

>--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
><miguelc@...> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 03 Mar 2008 22:34:18 -0000, "alexandru_mg3"
>> <alexandru_mg3@...> wrote:
>>
>> > 1. Irrelevant? I thought that this was one of the topic
>here...to
>> >clarify all the accentual aspects of this word.
>>
>> Irrelevant to your statement: "Lettish counterparts has no
>> acute accent" (of the verbal ending -ýti, -ît, -i"ti), which
>> is false.
>
>
> ...of the verbal endings is your own add-on. Don't add what I
>didn't say.

But you did say it:

Sergejus:

>It's tempting to relate it to the *-éje- of PIE causatives (especially
>since the verbs in -ýti show a(<*o)-vocalism), but I don't know what
>to do with 1. acute 2. an irregular development *-eje- > -y- (but cf.
>try~s '3' and the N. sg. of i-stems -y~s, both supposedly < *-ejes).

Marius:

>>It's tempting to relate it to the *-éje- of PIE causatives
>>(especially since the verbs in -ýti show a(<*o)-vocalism), but I don't know what
>>to do with
>> 1. acute
>
> Lettish counterparts has no acute accent.

The infinitive ending of the causatives/iteratives has an
acute in Balto-Slavic, and Sergejus didn't know what to do
with it. You replied that Latvian doesn't have an acute
there, which is simply false.


=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
miguelc@...