Re: PIE meaning of the Germanic dental preterit

On Tue, 04 Mar 2008 00:03:03 -0000, "alexandru_mg3"
<alexandru_mg3@...> wrote:

>--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
><miguelc@...> wrote:
>>
>> I only said that baidýti in Lithuanian was probably
>> denominal (as was confirmed by Sergejus).
>
> 1. "<baidýti> is not so clear" said Sergejus if your translation is
>"probably denominal" than OK.

I quote Sergejus:

Regarding the unexpected circumflex in Lith. <baidýti> (3d
pers. pres. <bai~do>) 'frighten' (and its nest): I guess the
Lith. verb is derived from or its pitch accent is influenced
by some noun which undergone a metatony, e. g. <bai~das>
'bugaboo'. The old acute survived in the now etymologically
opaque derivative <báime:> 'fear', which in view of the
interjection <báimenia> (expressing astonishment) must be
derived from *bHoih2-dH-men- (*dm > m is regular in
Lithuanian).

[Sergejus: are there any other examples of *-men-words
giving -me: instead of -muo?]

> 2. For Dersken is not Denominal (becuase whenever is the case he
>made a clear reference (see the book that I indicated to you)
> 3. Fraenkel didn't say anything related to this => so for him is
>not Denominal either because he also makes clera references whenever
>is the case (Did you consulted him yesterday, as you said?)

I did. Fraenkel doesn't say anything about the matter.

>
>> Verbs in -ýti can
>> be denominal or deverbal. Some of the examples in -dýti
>> (-dît) are clearly deverbal (baidýti ~ baîdît is not one of
>> them),
>
> It is: see above again.

By "clearly deverbal" I mean: there is a verb from which
they are derived.


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