Dear Yong Peng:

Now I understand. The root muc becomes different stems
(including itself) which conjugate differently (II and III)
regardless of prefixes.

Thanks.
jaran

--- Ong Yong Peng <yongpeng.ong@...> wrote:

> Dear Alan, Jaran and friends,
>
> Jaran: no, the conjugation is independent of prefixes. What it
> is
> dependent on is an advance topic, and beyond my comprehension.
>
> Perhaps our aspiring linguist friends can help.
>
> For now, it is simply a matter of knowing the conjugation for
> each
> verb. (Just as knowing the gender of each noun.)
>
> Allow me to illustrate, and bear with me if I get the
> terminology
> wrong.
>
>
> ROOT: muc
>
>
> (1a) The root is also a stem on its own.
>
> STEM: muc
>
> (1b) Now, into conjugation.
>
> II: mu~ncati (active)
> III: muccati (passive)
>
>
> (2a) Adding a prefix introduces a new stem.
>
> STEM: vi+muc
>
> (2b) Now, into conjugation.
>
> III: vimuccati (passive)
>
>
> Hope that helps.
>
>
> metta,
> Yong Peng.
>
>
> --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Jaran Jai-nhuknan wrote:
>
> I am now confused. From what Alan said, the conjugation
> depends on
> prefixes.(?) Should conjugation be considered of the based on
> the
> word alone and not the root? Are there a lot of roots that
> change
> conjugation when combined with different prefixes?
>
>
>
>

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com