W dniu 2012-06-04 11:20, Brian M. Scott pisze:
> Indeed. So? The conditions governing the different
> developments are known.
As is, practically, the complete story of the root *gWem-. It its bare
form, it was an aorist (perfective verb), meaning more or less 'make a
step, move on', and conjugated like this:
3sg. *gWém-t
3pl. *gWm-ént
From this root aorist (reflected in Ved. á-gan/á-gman), two present
formations were derived:
(a) a *-jé/ó- present (the source of Lat. venio: and Gk. báino)
3sg. *gWm.-jé-ti
3pl. *gWm.-jó-nti
(b) a *-sk^é/ó- present (the source of Gk. básko: and Ved. gáccHati)
3sg. *gWm.-sk^é-ti
3pl. *gWm.-sk^ó-nti
Finally, in the Core IE group (after the separation of Anatolian and
Tocharian), "simple thematic presents", which presumably originated as
old aorist subjunctives, became a new but extremely productive tyope of
present. A stem of this type is reflected e.g. in Germanic:
3sg. *gWém-e-ti
3pl. *gWém-o-nti
There is nothing particularly mysterious here. In Italic and Greek,
independently, old *-mj- became *-nj- through regular sound change,
hence <venio:> and <báino:> (from earlier *gWanjo: < *gWamjo: < *gWm.jo:).
Piotr