> As for <magan>, LIV (Zehnder) reconstructs a PIE root present *magH-
> with invariable vocalism and treats plural forms like OHG, OS, OFris.
> mugun as late and analogical. This verb is one mighty can of worms :)
>
Ah, yes.
Thread starting in
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/48817?var=0&l=1
Thread starting in
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/47230
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/66020
In Russian texts I find 'mana kartam' like constructions, eg. here
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/68397
'РаÑкопками, коÑоÑÑе пÑовел ... ÐÑÑ
аÑенко, оÑкÑÑÂÑо 52 погÑебениÑ... .'
"By the excavations, which were carried out by ... Kukharenko, were opened 52 burials ..."
As far as I know, the instrumental 'ÑаÑкопками' used in the instrumental sense, could also by used for the logical subject, like this:
ÐÑÑ
аÑенком оÑкÑÑÂÑо 52 погÑебениÑ
"By Kukharenko was opened 52 burials" (note, not "were opened")
This looks exactly like a mana kartam construction. And look at the nice -t-o ppp.
We could set up a whole preterite paradigm that way (I'll use pseudo-Russian)
mnoy otkryto
toboy otkryto
im otkryto
nami otkryto
vami otkryto
imi otkryto
"by me was-opened" etc meaning "I opened" etc; note, no copula
Now impersonal constructions like that 'me thinks' etc have a tendency to become personal, 'I think' etc, thus something like
ya otkryto
ty otkryto
on otkryto
my otkryto
vy otkryto
oni otkryto
I think that's where the Germanic regular preterite -(i)ða comes from. Or rather from a stressed -t-ó, stressed like the Russian ppp. in the feminine is, -tá, which makes me suspect Slavic fem. -a and neuter -o are the same suffix (*-aN).
Now the above uninflected (for person and number) new preterite together with an inflected present will create some tension in the verb system (but eg. Estonian is doing fine with inflected positive present sentences and non-inflected negative presents (ma jooksen, sa jooksed, ta jookseb "I run" etc vs. ma ei jookse, ta ei jookse, ta ei jookse (I don't run" etc), so people will tend to resolve it depending on temperament:
The higher classes (and southern Germans and Icelanders) want order so they begin to inflect the new preterite for person and number like the present is, by adding the present suffixes for person and numbers outside the 3sg.
The lower classes (and Anglos and Scandinavians) don't care, so they stop inflecting the present, like the new preterite isn't.
That only leaves the reduplication of the preterite ending in Gothic to be explained.
The same method of analogy would then have applied to *mag-, originally meaning something like Russian možno "it is possible, it is permitted"
So much for *-to, *-so could have been the origin for Germanic verbs with an -r- preterite.
Torsten