Dear Nina and Yong Peng,

YP:

> > aagamaasi is the aorist singular form of aagacchati. Is it in the
> > 2nd or the 3rd person?
> >
> > We had a discussion on this 6.5 years ago! ;-)
> ------
> N: It was fun reading old messages. You are right, aagamaasi is the
> third person. Warder, Ch 11: the second person is: agamaa. So I was
> wrong.

According to Cone's dictionary, "aagamaasi" can be either the 2nd or
3rd person singular of the aorist.

> Perhaps Jim has additional info from the old grammars he is

studying.

Consulting the old grammars on the aorist forms of "aagacchati" would
be long and tedious work. It is a lot easier and faster to check a
dictionary such as Cone's which gives (DOP I 280-1):

aorist 3rd sing.: (a) aagamaa (b) aagamaasi (3) aagami (d) aagacchi,
aaga~nchi
aorist 2nd sing.: (a) aagamaa, aagamo (b) aagamaasi (3) aagami (d)
aagacchi, aaga~nchi

Best,
Jim