zompist bboard

THIS IS AN ARCHIVE ONLY - see Ephemera
It is currently Fri Oct 18, 2019 9:57 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 354 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2016 11:03 am 
Smeric
Smeric
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2015 6:44 am
Posts: 1998
Location: suburbs of Mrin
Now, instead of reading Moist's posts in the voice of Lewis Black, know read the posts in the voice of Jabba the Hutt.

_________________
ìtsanso, God In The Mountain, may our names inspire the deepest feelings of fear in urkos and all his ilk, for we have saved another man from his lies! I welcome back to the feast hall kal, who will never gamble again! May the eleven gods bless him!
kårroť


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 31, 2016 4:49 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Posts: 4545
Location: the Imperial Corridor
fuck u yng

Albanian Celtic

Sound changes

Owis ekwoi-kwe. Owis, kwesjo wlānā ne est, ekwos spekét, oinom barúm woxom wéxontam, oinom-kwe megam borom oinom-kwe doniom āku berontam. Owis nu ékwobos weukwét: “Krid áxnutor mai, ekwos ágontom wīrom wídanti”.
oynos dwaw tri:s kʷetwares kʷinkʷe swexs sextam oxtu: nawan dekam

Proto-Celtic to Proto-Goidelic
au ou oi > ʉ:
ei > e:
ai > ɛː
a: > o:
eu > ʉ:

a > e / _${V[+front +high] j}

r > ɾ / C_
ɸ > 0
kw > p
w > gw / #_
s > 0 / #_{l m n}
sp sr sw > f fr xw
xt > θ
j > ð / _#

mb nd > mm nn
b d g m > v ð ɣ ṽ / V_V
p t k > b d g / V_V
pp tt kk > f θ x / V_V
p t k > f θ x / {l r}_

0 > h / V[-long]_ unless C[velar]_ or it's a particle
h > x

i u > e o / penultimate stressed syllables before -a(:)

Owis ebʉ:-gweh. Owis, pesjoh gwlo:no: ne-est, ebos fegét, ʉ:nom barúm gwoxom gwéxontam, ʉ:nom-gweh meɣam borom ʉ:nom-gweh doniom o:ɣuh berontam. Owis nuh ébovos gwa:bét: “Krid áxnudor mɛːh, ebos áɣontom gwīrom gwíðanti”.
ʉ:nos dwʉ: tri:s pedwares pimpex xwexs seθam oθu: nawan degam

Proto-Brythonic to Middle Cëmraeg
ll > ɬ
l > ɬ / #_
s z > ʃ ʒ / _V[+high]
o > u / _N _NP _LP
o > we / #_

eː > iaː / _${i j}
eː > ieː
iaː ieː > aː eː > _{mm nn nt}
a > e / _${i j}

oː > wa / _$i
ɛː > oː
oː ʉː > weː wiː EXCEPT _{s #}
weː wiː > gwe: gwi: > ɟeː ɟyː / #_
weː wiː > eː iː / C[labial]_ _C[labial]
wi(:) > y
w > 0 / _P P_
w > v
k g / _{i y} > c ɟ

Vm Vn > V~ / _C
m n s > 0 / _#
xs > x / _#
n > nj / j V_i
Vn > V~ɾ / _V
lɣ ɣl > ɫ
l > ɫ / _V
ɫj > l
ɣ > 0

i~ i:~ > je~ je:~
u~ u:~ > ë~ ë~:
V~ : V

Word stress shifts to the penultimate syllable if it is heavy; else, on the antepenultimate if available; else on the penultimate.
a u > ë / _[-stress]#
V > 0 / _[-stress]#
V: > V / _[-stress]
a u > ë / _[-stress] when immediately pretonic
t d s > ts z ʃ / _i(:)
tr dr > tʃ dʒ
Vvi > y
i[-stress] > ë
tj dj sj zj > c ɟ ʃ ʒ
some syncope of unstressed vowels in VC_CV

ɟyːn dy: tʃi: pedër pjepex xvex seθa oθu navë degë

Middle Cëmraeg to Cëmraeg
ɣ > ð / _i _j
xv > f
ɬ > θ
e > ë / _sC
st sk > ʃ h
kt > ft
VvV[+front] > y
Vva Vvë > V
kl gl > c ɟ

V: > V

gjyn dy çi pedër pjep(eh) feh setha othu na degë

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 03, 2016 5:18 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Posts: 4545
Location: the Imperial Corridor
Cëmrëg loses all the cases except nom/acc/dat, so:

makʷos makʷom makʷūy
makʷoi makʷūs makʷobos

mabos mabom mebi:ð
mebʉ: mebi:s mabovos

Let's say s > sh / V[+high]_ and y doesn't unround around labials. Also, -obos > -u. Also, u: > i: at some point, probably early. Did a: > o: actually happen? Doesn't look like it. Also, final vowels shorten ebfore -s.

mab mabë mebidh
meby mebësh mabu

----

dūnom dūnom dūnūy
dūnā dūnā dūnobos

di:nom di:nom di:ni:ð
di:nā di:nā di:nobos

ɟe4ë ɟe4ë zinjið
ɟe4a ɟe4a ɟe4ë

gjerë gjerë zinjidh (presumably gjeridh)
gjera gjera gjeru

----

ɸlāmā ɸlāmām ɸlāmāy
ɸlāmās ɸlāmās ɸlāmābos

lāṽā lāṽām lāṽāð
lāṽās lāṽās lāṽāvos

θa(va) θa(va) θa(va)ð
θa(vë) θa(vë) θa(va)vs

tha(va) tha(va) tha(va)dh
tha(vë) tha(vë) tha(va)fs

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 04, 2016 7:38 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Posts: 4545
Location: the Imperial Corridor
Proto-Kharidze declensions: (Note that <ɪ> is notation for epenthetic -i-.)

Consonant-stem R-augment: (*wat-)
Code:
DIR watɪR   watRɪh
OBL watm    watmh
INS wateRa  watib
LAT watɪb   watnv
LOC wate    watih


In Amqoli, applying the sound changes strictly:
Code:
becha  bachxi
batam  batam
bacha  bachib
bachib batemb
bache  bachi


In Amqoli, syllabic *m *n become -am -en.

However, the suffix vowel -i is analogized out to the plural declension in general, aided by the reformation of the direct plural to -ɪRɪh, and -t- is regularized to -ch-. (Note that -iR causes a-fronting, but -eR doesn't, even though they both become -ya. Presumably these passed through [ja e̯a].) This gives:
Code:
becha   bachi
bacham  bachim
bacha   bachib
bachib  bachemb
bache   bachib


But the lative is lost.

Back-stem (-o or -u) R-augment: (*móɗo-; note the behavior of -R in the direct plural)
Code:
DIR moɗoR   moɗRoh
OBL moɗom   moɗomɪh
INS moɗoeRa moɗoib
LAT moɗob   moɗonv
LOC moɗoe   moɗoih


In Amqoli, applying the sound changes strictly: (-oeRa > -ojaa > -oja > -ozh > -uzh; -oe > -e; -oCɪ > -Cɪ)
Code:
DIR molyba  molyu
OBL molyum  molymi
INS molyzha molyib
LAT molyob  molyumb
LOC molye   molyi


(Note that *ɓólyu- has an identical paradigm except in the direct/absolutive case, which has molyu moli. Presumably, *R in the C_ environment persisted much longer than *R in V_, hence the lack of analogy.)

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 04, 2016 11:26 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Posts: 4545
Location: the Imperial Corridor
23:45 < nort> feny 'pick up' > lok feny 'be picked up' > bbooan lok feny 'high' > t!arp!i bbooan lok feny 'respected high thing' -> 'sky' -> 'heaven'. ok
23:45 < nort> this becomes
23:45 < nort> well, t!arp!i is an article
23:45 < nort> and maybe this is lost or shortened to t!ar
23:46 < nort> monrukoush
23:46 < nort> well
23:47 < nort> monggukoush maybe
23:47 < nort> bc velar/uvular harmony
23:47 < nort> which could shorten to mongkoush
23:48 < nort> Kapi Mongkoush

23:56 < nort> which of c!hiip and lrur mean 'give' and 'man'
23:56 < nort> i forget
23:57 < nort> nt!ay looks like a classifier
23:57 < nort> no
23:57 < nort> nt!ay must mean 'thing'
23:58 < nort> heaven be_at ? ? large~large do_to ?
23:58 < nort> heaven be_at take? thing? large_large do_to man?
23:58 < nort> that looks right
23:58 < Oligomath> yes
23:58 < nort> ok, pthagbot approves. c!hiip, nt!ay, and lrur mean, respectively, take, thing, and man
00:01 < nort> what no
00:01 < nort> nt!ay means man
00:01 < nort> Oligomath: you are wrong
00:02 < Oligomath> right exactly
00:01 < nort> what no
00:01 < nort> nt!ay means man
00:01 < nort> Oligomath: you are wrong
00:02 < nort> c!hiip is thing
00:03 < nort> so lrur means... receive
00:06 < nort> N|ay ŋa xɛ ŋwe ŋa ǂhiip ɨx Cañ. = man NEG have ? NEG thing recompense heaven
00:06 < nort> the alternative
00:06 < nort> is to have j!ey become the word for 'human'
00:08 < nort> oh mb lrur is like 'nourish'
00:08 < nort> who cares abt lrur
00:08 < nort> ngwe could be 'good'
00:09 < nort> uix is prob 'recompense'
00:15 < nort> also @` > M`

Qapi Mongkoush nurrumsh ship 'o'o shi shdug kouzou dlaha.
qapi_mongkoush ne-k'-rum-sh ship 'o'o shi shdug kou-zou dlaha
heaven IPFV-TRANS-create-BEN thing ten_thousand BEN man NMLZ-be_nourished EVID

Shdug nganxish ship tla' mang fushish Qapi Mongkoush.
shdug nga-n-x-sh ship tla' mang fu-shi-sh qapi_mongkoush
man not_have-ESS-BEN thing good for_the_purpose_of RECIP-give-BEN heaven

Xougo. Xougo. Xougo. Xougo. Xougo. Xougo. Xougo.
xouN-xo
HORT-kill

and, old amqoli seven kill stele sig:
Dzere kharelelis bgulim dqumarzu da tuxorchi.
Bguli umkharye dzerem dabqamdze da nja.
Cor. Cor. Cor. Cor. Cor. Cor. Cor.

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 05, 2016 2:13 pm 
Avisaru
Avisaru

Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 3:17 pm
Posts: 880
Location: Llundain
im not comfortable with this thread rn

_________________
كان يا ما كان / يا صمت العشية / قمري هاجر في الصبح بعيدا / في العيون العسلية

tà yi póbo tsùtsùr ciivà dè!

short texts in Cuhbi

Risha Cuhbi grammar


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 05, 2016 11:44 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Posts: 4545
Location: the Imperial Corridor
im not comfortable with the brythonic copula so were even

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 13, 2016 8:09 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Posts: 4545
Location: the Imperial Corridor
Narngic is probably separated from the rest of Macro-Vengic, and Whatic is a small and isolated family spoken presumably in the inaccessible highlands. What about Hluic, Zotic, and Vengic?

Zotic could be in contact with Qoic, which would lead to tonogenesis.

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 26, 2016 9:01 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Posts: 4545
Location: the Imperial Corridor
brythonic is hard, let's go shopping

Pannonian

An Indo-European language that originated somewhere in the general vicinity of Hungary before fucking off to Estonia, perhaps due to the Huns.

Preliminary sound changes leading to Proto-Pannonian:

Dḱm̥tóm Law: Word-initial coronal-dorsal clusters simplify to dorsals, with analogy throughout the paradigms. ('Earth' is reconstructed based on the accusative, as per Balto-Slavic.)

Standard Laryngeal Law 1: h₁e h₂e h₃e eh₁ eh₂ eh₃ > h₁e h₂a h₃o eh₁ ah₂ ah₃
Greek Laryngeal Law: h₁ h₂ h₃ / (# C)_(# C) > e a o
Standard Laryngeal Law 2: h₁ h₂ h₃ > H
Standard Laryngeal Law 3: VH > V:
Standard Laryngeal Law 4: H > 0 (including between a syllabic resonant and a vowel)

Bartholomae's Law: Plosives in a cluster containing a voiced aspirate become voiced aspirates. /s/ in a cluster containing a voiced aspirate becomes /z/.

Sievers' Law: *y and *w develop a corresponding epenthetic vowel when following a cluster.

Osthoff's Law: Long vowels shorten before *RC in the same syllable.

Winter's Law: Voiced plosives become preglottalized, merging with *hC (as in Dewrad's Wenetic) as vowel length.

Northern European declension law: Declensional *-bʰ- becomes -m-.

Syllabic resonant loss: Syllabic resonants resolve to uR sequences.

Boukolos rule: Labiovelars delabialize adjacent to /u w/.

Eimi rule: *s > z between a vowel and a voiced consonant. z drops and lengthens a preceding vowel.

RUKI retraction: *s becomes š when following /i y u w r/ or a dorsal (incl. palatovelars).

Pseudo-Tocharian stop shift: d > dz

Pseudo-Phrygian stop shift: P B Bʰ > P P B

Satemization: *ḱ ǵ > č ǯ. (Following -s is lost.)

First vowel merger: Unstressed, non-initial *e *o become i u, except in diphthongs, or when preceded by *y *w, in which case they become a.

TT rule: *-tt- > -st-

W loss: Cw > CC ( > C / #_)

Not Kluge's Law: Nasals assimilate to a preceding resonant. (but *-rm- > *-nn-)

First vowel shift and palatalization:
0) š > x
0.5) sy > š
1) e > yə
2) Ky > Č
3) Kʷy > Ky
4) Ty > T́, but ts > ś
5) ry > r; clusters with r don't assimilate for palatalization
6) a > ə / _[-stress]${i u}
7) unC > ́ənC
8) o > a
9) Ti > T́i

This is probably when Latin loanwords start coming in -- although most early ones would be before the vowel shift. The inventory at this point is:

/a ə i u ā ē ō ī ū ai au ei eu oi ou/
/p b pʲ bʲ t d tʲ dʲ ts č ǯ k g/
/s sʲ š x/
/m mʲ n nʲ/
/w wʲ l lʲ r/

óinus tṓw trə́yis kəttáris ṕə́nki šəč śəptúm áčtṓw néwun śə́čumt

kurḗi áwix, kə́šu wullā́ ńə yəst, yə́ččuns šṕə́čit, oinum ǯə kurúm wáǯum ẃə́ǯəntum oinum-ki mḗčam bárum, oinum-ki ǯḿə́num ṓču b́ə́rəntum.
áwix tu yəččoiḿus weukít: 'čḗr əgnutár moi yəččəns ā́čəntum ənírum wītsəntéi.'
yəččōs tu weukónt: 'člud́í, áwei, čḗr ǯə əgnutár unsméi wītsəntḿás. anḗr, pát́ix, áẃum ur wullā́m śəbi kurréut́i nu gənnum ẃəstrum ńəǯi áẃum wullā́ yəśt́i.'
tṓts čəčluwṓs ówix ā́črum būkít.


----

Before the first vowel merger: (in case I decide to merge o ō into a ā as most satem languages do)

óinos twṓu tréyis kʷetwóris pénkʷi swéč septúm očtṓw néwun tséčumt

kurḗi ówiš, kʷésyo wullā́ ne est, éčwons spéčet, oinom ge kurúm wóǯom wéǯontum oinom-kʷi mḗčam bórom, oinom-kʷi ǯménum ṓču bérontum.
ówiš tu ečwoim(y)os weukít: 'čḗr agnutór moi éčwons ā́čontum anírum wītsuntéi.'
éčwōs tu weukónt: 'čludí, ówei, čḗr ge agnutór unsméi wītsuntm(y)ós. anḗr, pótiš, áwyom ur wullā́m sebi kurnéuti nu gʷénnom wéstrom néǯi áwyom wullā́ ésti.'
tṓts čečluwṓs ówiš ā́črom būkít.

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.


Last edited by Nortaneous on Tue Sep 27, 2016 5:28 pm, edited 4 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 27, 2016 10:48 am 
Smeric
Smeric
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 5:00 pm
Posts: 1630
Location: Braunschweig, Germany
Looks nice so far. An interesting combination of changes from various IE languages all around Europe, quite reasonable for an IE language that sits right in the centre of it all.

_________________
...brought to you by the Weeping Elf
Tha cvastam émi cvastam santham amal phelsa. -- Friedrich Schiller
ESTAR-3SG:P human-OBJ only human-OBJ true-OBJ REL-LOC play-3SG:A


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 28, 2016 4:34 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Posts: 4545
Location: the Imperial Corridor
A problem is that, with the current sound changes, the 3sg and 2pl primary endings merge. There are a number of possible solutions to this:
- graft -s onto the 2pl by analogy from the 1pl, or shift the 2du into the 2pl before deleting the duals (they're functionally identical, and this is what Latin did)
- use the secondary endings, at least for the 3sg (as in Albanian, apparently?)
- graft something, maybe *h2en 'there' or whatever *-nu-like element Tocharian used, onto the 3sg ending
- - actually, *h2en would give -ti-an > -tyan > -t'an, which doesn't solve much, although Tocharian dropped the -ti- entirely
- rebuild the endings along hyper-Slavic lines -- -om -sis -tit
- analogize the thematic vowel to -u- in all plural endings, distinguishing 3sg and 2pl as -i-ti and -u-ti

For now, I'll assume the secondary endings displace the primary endings, at least in the singular, with the exception of Slavic rebuilding of the first-person singular:
Code:
yəb-ō-m yəb-u-wi yəb-u-mu
yəb-i-s yəb-i-tu yəb-i-ti
yəb-i-t yəb-i-tā yəb-ə-nt

The 2du 3du endings may have had -m.

edit:

Code:
Standard Secondary              . Primary + Thematic Analogy      . Pseudo-Slavic                     . Secondary + Thematic Analogy
yebh-o-h2 yebh-o-we   yebh-o-me | yebh-o-mi yebh-e-wos yebh-o-mos | yebh-o-h2-m yebh-o-we   yebh-o-me | yebh-o-h2 yebh-e-we   yebh-o-me
yebh-e-s  yebh-e-tom  yebh-e-te | yebh-e-si yebh-e-tes yebh-o-te  | yebh-e-s    yebh-e-tom  yebh-e-te | yebh-e-s  yebh-e-tom  yebh-o-te
yebh-e-t  yebh-e-teh2 yebh-o-nt | yebh-e-ti yebh-e-tes yebh-o-nti | yebh-e-t    yebh-e-teh2 yebh-o-nt | yebh-e-t  yebh-e-teh2 yebh-o-nt
--------------------------------+---------------------------------+-----------------------------------+--------------------------------
 yəb-ō     yəb-u-wi    yəb-u-mi |  yəb-u-mi  yəb-i-wus  yəb-u-mus |  yəb-ō-m     yəb-u-wi    yəb-u-mi |  yəb-ō     yəb-i-wi    yəb-u-mi
 yəb-i-s   yəb-i-tum   yəb-u-ći |  yəb-i-śi  yəb-i-ćis  yəb-u-ći  |  yəb-i-s     yəb-i-tum   yəb-i-ći |  yəb-i-s   yəb-i-tum   yəb-u-ći
 yəb-i-t   yəb-i-tā    yəb-ə-nt |  yəb-i-ći  yəb-i-ćis  yəb-ə-ńći |  yəb-i-t     yəb-i-tā    yəb-ə-nt |  yəb-i-t   yəb-i-tā    yəb-ə-nt


Albanian may also have used *-nu:- -- to form the 2pl. So it sounds like I could put that anywhere.

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 30, 2016 1:08 am 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Posts: 4545
Location: the Imperial Corridor
The Pannonian verb has to have the customary complex tense/aspect system, but also has to avoid replicating the forms of both natlangs and Wenetic. This is difficult, so instead the verbal system will be based to some extent on Italic.

The present is formed, as in Albanian, by the secondary stems; however, unlike Albanian and Slavic, it undergoes no m-grafting. The thematic vowel undergoes analogy at some point before the formation of the distinctive Pannonian schwa (from *u before RC sequences and stressed *e), with the end result of the fourth declensional system given below.

The future is formed, as in Celtic(?), from the *-(h1)se- desiderative.

The perfect is divided into two classes: strong/underived and weak/derived. Strong verbs form their past tenses with the PIE stative/perfect; weak verbs form them by periphrasis of the present tense of *weh2dh- "go". This is because the aorist is preserved in Pannonian, and is therefore unavailable for cannibalization. The productive form is the sigmatic aorist, which, since I can't find any information on it, I have decided will be athematic and use the primary endings, unless anyone has any better ideas.

The subjunctive is formed from the optative.

At this stage, there is the following conjugation: (ignoring the dual and the subjunctive)

Code:
Present             . Future                   . Perfect           . Aorist                .
wéyd-o-h2 wéyd-o-me | wéyd-s-o-h2 wéyd-s-o-mos | wóyd-h2e  wid-mé   | wḗyd-s-mi wéyd-s-mos  | PIE
wéyd-e-s  wéyd-o-te | wéyd-s-e-si wéyd-s-o-te  | wóyd-th2e wid-é    | wḗyd-s-si wéyd-s-te   |
wéyd-e-t  wéyd-o-nt | wéyd-s-e-ti wéyd-s-o-nti | wóyd-e    wid-ḗr   | wḗyd-s-ti wéyd-s-nti  |
--------------------+--------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------+
wḗyc-ō    wḗyc-u-mi | wéyt-s-ō    wéyt-s-u-mus | wṓyc-a    wīć-myə́  | wḗyt-s-mi wéyt-s-mus  | PIE > PP
wḗyc-i-s  wḗyc-u-ći | wéyt-s-i-śi wéyt-s-u-ći  | wóyś-ći   wīć-ə́    | wḗyt-s-i  wéy -ś-ći   |
wḗyc-i-t  wḗyc-ə-nt | wéyt-s-i-ći wéyt-s-ə-ńći | wṓyć-i    wīć-ḗr   | wḗy -s-ti wéyt-s-əńći |
--------------------+--------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------+
wḗytsō    wḗytsumi  | wéytsō      wéytsumus    | wṓytsa    wīćmyə́   | wḗytsmi   wéytsmus    | PP < PIE
wḗyćis    wḗytsući  | wéyćiśi     wéytsući     | wṓyśći    wīćə́     | wḗyći     wéyśći      |
wḗyćit    wḗytsənt  | wéyćići     wéytsəńći    | wṓyći     wītsḗr   | wḗyśći    wéytsəńći   |
--------------------+--------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------+
wḗyts-ō   wḗyts-umi | wéyts-ō     wéyts-umus   | wṓyts-a   wīć -myə́ | wḗyts-smi wéyts-mus   | Synchronic
wḗyć -is  wḗyts-ući | wéyć -iśi   wéyts-ući    | wṓyts-ći  wīć -yə́  | wḗyts-śśi wéyts-ći    | segmentation
wḗyć -it  wḗyts-ənt | wéyć -ići   wéyts-əńći   | wṓyć -i   wīts-ḗr  | wḗyts-ći  wéyts-əńći  |
--------------------+--------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------+
 eD  -ō   eD   -umi |  e   -ō      e   -sumus  |  oD  -a    zDy-myə́ |  ē   -smi  e   -mus   | Pattern
 eD y-is  eD   -ući |  e  y-iśi    e   -sući   |  oD  -ći   zDy-ə́   |  ē   -śśi  e   -ći    |
 eD y-it  eD   -ənt |  e  y-ići    e   -səńći  |  oD y-i    zD -ḗr  |  ē   -ći   e   -əńći  |


This is, I assume, wrong, because I know nothing about PIE; and there are presumably many irregularities, especially in the perfect. Note that, in Pannonian, Winter's Law operates even through resonants, and note that voice assimilation is regressive (it was, right?) -- this means that roots ending in a PIE voiced plosive will have length alternations (marked D), which will cause ablaut later when the vowel system blows up. The sound changes from Proto-Pannonian to Modern Pannonian only exist as rough outlines in my head right now, but it'll probably look something like this (assuming the *d stuff gets analogized out):

Code:
võisua   viisün  | vissua  vissuch | vüasë  vismjë | võismi võismuch
võitsich viisüts | vissis  vissüts | vüassi vitsë  | võissi võissi
võitsi   võitsin | vissits vissin  | vüatsi visiär | võissi võissin

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 30, 2016 6:29 am 
Smeric
Smeric
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:48 am
Posts: 2144
Location: Britannia
The 1sg thematic secondary ending was *-om


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 30, 2016 2:38 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Posts: 4545
Location: the Imperial Corridor
I thought there were some languages that used the secondary endings for everything except the first person, and some (Slavic, Albanian?) that doubled up to *-oh2m. If there are, Pannonian is one of them.

Also it looks like I was wrong about the sigmatic aorist: in Albanian it uses the secondary endings.
Code:
*e-də-s-m *e-də-(s)me
*e-dō-s-s *e-də-te
*e-də-s-t *e-də-(s)nti


Jasanoff seems to think the sigmatic aorist originated from a pre-PIE *h2e-conjugation root aorist contaminated in the 3sg by the athematic Narten s-present, so:
Code:
*próḱ-h2e  *próḱ-me
*próḱ-th2e *próḱ-(t)e
*prḗḱ-s-t  *préḱ-rs

...and he says they end up using the secondary endings there as well. so the Pannonian aorist will use the secondary endings, and maybe lose the primary endings entirely? (except for -h2)

Another possibility would be to have the present-perfects expand to take over the whole system, shift the present tense [using the primary endings] to a past imperfective, use the aorist for the simple past, and reinterpret the present-perfect root as a present-marking root, innovating a present ~imperfective/durative/habitual from present root + primary [past imperfective] endings and maybe something else from the past imperfective or aorist roots plus the present-perfect endings. We'll assume that the perfect plural's stress on the ending was carried over into the habitual conjugation before raising of unstressed /e o/.

Code:
Past Imperfective    . Future                   . Present            . Past Perfective      . Habitual           . ???
wéyd-o-h2 wéyd-o-mos | wéyd-s-o-h2 wéyd-s-o-mos | wóyd-h2e  wid-mé   | wḗyd-s-m  wéyd-s-me  | wóyd-o-h2 wid-o-me |
wéyd-e-si wéyd-o-te  | wéyd-s-e-si wéyd-s-o-te  | wóyd-th2e wid-é    | wḗyd-s-s  wéyd-s-te  | wóyd-e-si wid-o-te |
wéyd-e-ti wéyd-o-nti | wéyd-s-e-ti wéyd-s-o-nti | wóyd-e    wid-ḗr   | wḗyd-s-t  wéyd-s-nt  | wóyd-e-ti wid-o-nt |     
---------------------+--------------------------+--------------------+----------------------+--------------------+
wḗyc-ō    wḗyc-u-mus | wéyt-s-ō    wéyt-s-u-mus | wṓyc-a    wīć-myə́  | wḗyt-s-m  wéyt-s-mi  | wṓyc-ō    wīc-ó-mi | wḗyts-a  wēyć -myə́
wḗyc-i-si wḗyc-u-ći  | wéyt-s-i-śi wéyt-s-u-ći  | wóyś-ći   wīć-ə́    | wḗyt-s-s  wéy -ś-ći  | wṓyć-i-śi wīc-ó-ti | wḗyś -ći wēyć -ə́
wḗyc-i-ti wḗyc-ə-nći | wéyt-s-i-ći wéyt-s-ə-ńći | wṓyć-i    wīc-ḗr   | wḗy -s-t  wéyt-s-ənt | wṓyć-i-ći wīc-ó-nt | wḗyć -i  wēyc -ḗr
---------------------+--------------------------+--------------------+----------------------+--------------------+
wḗytsō    wḗytsumus  | wéytsō      wéytsumus    | wṓytsa    wīćmyə́   | wḗytsum   wéytsme    | wṓytsō    wītsómi  |
wḗyćiśi   wḗytsući   | wéyćiśi     wéytsući     | wṓyśći    wīćə́     | wḗyts     wéyśći     | wṓyćiśi   wītsóći  | 
wḗyćići   wḗytsənći  | wéyćići     wéytsəńći    | wṓyći     wītsḗr   | wḗyst     wéytsəńt   | wṓyćići   wītsónt  |
---------------------+--------------------------+--------------------+----------------------+--------------------+
wḗyts-ō   wḗyts-umus | wéyts-ō     wéyts-umus   | wṓyts-a   wīć -myə́ | wḗyts-sum wéyts-me   | wṓyts-ō   wīts-ómi |
wḗyć -iśi wḗyts-ući  | wéyć -iśi   wéyts-ući    | wṓyts-ći  wīć -yə́  | wḗyts-s   wéyts-ći   | wṓyć -iśi wīts-óći |
wḗyć -ići wḗyts-ənći | wéyć -ići   wéyts-əńći   | wṓyć -i   wīts-ḗr  | wḗyts-st  wéyts-ənt  | wṓyć -ići wīts-ónt |
---------------------+--------------------------+--------------------+----------------------+--------------------+
 eD  -ō   eD   -umus |  e   -ō      e   -sumus  |  oD  -a    zDy-myə́ |  ē   -sum  e   -me   |  ṓ   -ō    zD -ómi |  eD  -a   eD  -myə́
 eD y-iśi eD   -ući  |  e  y-siśi   e   -sući   |  oD  -ći   zDy-ə́   |  ē   -s    e   -ći   |  ṓ  y-iśi  zD -óći |  eD  -ći  eD y-ə́
 eD y-ići eD   -ənći |  e  y-sići   e   -səńći  |  oD y-i    zD -ḗr  |  ē   -st   e   -ənt  |  ṓ  y-ići  zD -ónt |  eD y-i   eD   -ḗr
---------------------+--------------------------+--------------------+----------------------+--------------------+


But that's not in line with what happened in most of Europe.

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 01, 2016 6:04 am 
Smeric
Smeric
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:48 am
Posts: 2144
Location: Britannia
If you want to follow Europe, use standard Brugmannian PIE. Jasanoff's *h₂e-conjugation theory is explicitly aimed at reconstructing pre-Anatolian PIE.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 01, 2016 1:45 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Posts: 4545
Location: the Imperial Corridor
OK, to hell with trying to piece it together from Wikipedia and papers then. Not sure where to start with books -- I've managed to find a PDF of Clarkson's textbook, but that's all. Szemerenyi?

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 01, 2016 3:01 pm 
Smeric
Smeric
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 5:00 pm
Posts: 1630
Location: Braunschweig, Germany
Get Indo-European Language and Culture by Benjamin W. Fortson IV. It's IMHO the best book on the market on PIE, and affordable. Szemerényi is not recommendable, it was out of date even when it was written (S. never accepted laryngeal theory).

_________________
...brought to you by the Weeping Elf
Tha cvastam émi cvastam santham amal phelsa. -- Friedrich Schiller
ESTAR-3SG:P human-OBJ only human-OBJ true-OBJ REL-LOC play-3SG:A


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 02, 2016 7:10 am 
Smeric
Smeric

Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2002 2:49 am
Posts: 2316
Location: Bonn, Germany
WeepingElf wrote:
Szemerényi is not recommendable, it was out of date even when it was written (S. never accepted laryngeal theory).

Actually, he did, he just had his own version (a one-laryngeal theory that explained the threefold vowel reflexes in Greek by analogy.). S. is actually the reason for the few cases of laryngeal reconstructions showing up in Pokorny's dictionary. S. is ok when you look for paradigms in IE languages or an explanation of the stress patterns; if you can get a PDF somewhere or a cheap used copy, get it; but if you want the current state of the art, go for something else. I never read Fortson, as I don't feel the need to read my Xth introduction by now, but as you say, I've seen it generally being praised.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 02, 2016 10:45 am 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Posts: 4545
Location: the Imperial Corridor
The idea there is that, since this is somewhere between Italic, Balto-Slavic, and Greek [actually Phrygian -- I'm preserving middle -r, for example, which Phrygian does and Greek doesn't*], I don't have to care about laryngeals (or anything else that isn't necessary for NW IE) except for the triple reflex (if I don't take it out).

* but not the augment, which Phrygian and Greek share, since eventually stress will become word-initial [due to Germanic and Finnic influence?], maybe with the location of the original accent preserved as word-level tone; the augment wasn't obligatory in Homeric Greek

Fortson doesn't give information on the innovations of the various branches; I'd probably follow Italic here to some extent, if only because Latin is the only old IE language I know anything about. I'll certainly need an innovated imperfect. Would making most verbs into unreduplicated present-perfects [and preserving the other tenses some other way] be a plausible innovation?

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 02, 2016 11:36 am 
Smeric
Smeric

Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2002 2:49 am
Posts: 2316
Location: Bonn, Germany
You get unreduplicated present verbs based on old perfects in both Germanic and Balto-Slavic, although they are rare in both language families. If you make that a more frequent phenomenon, you need to have a look at the semantics.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 02, 2016 1:14 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Posts: 4545
Location: the Imperial Corridor
The unreduplicated present < perfect verbs that I know of all developed from semantic drift of stative forms, which tended to form doublets rather than displace old presents, so that idea is out. More information is needed. Following Janasoff on Latin...

* The future perfect originated as an s-future built from the perfect stem, and gained -u- by analogy from the perfect form of *bhuH-.
* -istī may be from *-i-sth2e with unknown 'union vowel' -i-; there's a -sta-like 2sg perfect ending elsewhere in IE, possibly by resegmentation of *t-th2e > *s-th2e. The union vowel arose for some reason to separate the ending from the stem.
* *deiks-se-t 'will have said' ~ *deikse-t 'will say' homophony was intolerable, so *-i- was generalized into future perfects of s-perfect verbs.
* There was a lot of analogy from the copula, so let's do the copula first. Here's the regular development:

Code:
Pres Ind    . Impf Ind      . Subjunctive   . Optative       . Imperative
h1és-mi     | h1és-m        | h1és-o-h2     | h1s-yéh1-m     |
h1és-i      | h1és          | h1és-e-si     | h1s-yéh1-s     | h1és, h1s-dhí
h1és-ti     | h1és-t        | h1és-e-ti     | h1s-yéh1-t     | h1és-tu
h1s-wós     | h1s-wé        | h1és-o-wos    | h1s-ih1-wé     | 
h1s-tés     | h1s-tóm       | h1és-e-tes    | h1s-ih1-tóm    | h1s-tóm
h1s-tés     | h1s-téh2m     | h1és-e-tes    | h1s-ih1-téh2m  | h1s-téh2m
h1s-m̥ós     | h1s-m̥é        | h1és-o-mos    | h1s-ih1-mé     |
h1s-té      | h1s-té        | h1és-e-te     | h1s-ih1-té     | h1s-té
h1s-énti    | h1s-énd       | h1és-o-nti    | h1s-ih1-énd    | h1s-éntu
------------+---------------+---------------+----------------+--------------
bhúH-m      |               | bhúH-o-h2     | bhuH-yéh1-m    |
bhúH-s      |               | bhúH-e-si     | bhuH-yéh1-s    |
bhúH-t      |               | bhúH-e-ti     | bhuH-yéh1-t    |
bhuH-wé     |               | bhúH-o-wos    | bhuH-ih1-wé    |
bhuH-tóm    |               | bhúH-e-tes    | bhuH-ih1-tóm   |
bhuH-téh2m  |               | bhúH-e-tes    | bhuH-ih1-téh2m |
bhuH-mé     |               | bhúH-o-mos    | bhuH-ih1-mé    |
bhuH-té     |               | bhúH-e-te     | bhuH-ih1-té    |
bhuH-énd    |               | bhúH-o-nti    | bhuH-ih1-énd   |

Pres Indic  . Impf Indic    . Subj          . Opt            . Imper
  ḗ-mi      |   yə́s-um      |  yə́s-o-:      |   s-yḗ-m       |
  yə́ś-i     |   yə́s         |  yə́ś-i-śi     |   s-yḗ-s       |   yə́s,   ź-d́í
  yə́ś-t́i    |   yə́s-t       |  yə́ś-i-t́i     |   s-yḗ-t       |   yə́s-tu
  s-wás     |   ś-ẃə́        |  yə́s-u-was    |   ś-ī  -ẃə́     | 
  ś-t́ə́s     |   s-tám       |  yə́ś-i-t́is    |   ś-ī  -tám    |   s-tám
  ś-t́ə́s     |   s-tā́m       |  yə́ś-i-t́is    |   ś-ī  -tā́m    |   s-tā́m
  s-umás    |   s-uḿə́       |  yə́s-u-mus    |   ś-ī  -ḿə́     |
  ś-t́ə́      |   ś-t́ə́        |  yə́ś-i-t́i     |   ś-ī  -t́ə́     |   ś-t́ə́
  ś-ə́ńt́i    |   s-ḗnts      |  yə́s-ə-nti    |   ś-ī  -ḗnts   |   ś-ə́ntu
------------+---------------+---------------+----------------+--------------
 bū́ -m      |               |  bū́ -o-:      |  bū -yḗ-m      |
 bū́ -š      |               |  bū́ -i-śi     |  bū -yḗ-s      |
 bū́ -t      |               |  bū́ -i-t́i     |  bū -yḗ-t      |
 bū -ẃə́     |               |  bū́ -a-was    |  bū -ī  -ẃə́    |
 bū -tám    |               |  bū́ -i-t́is    |  bū -ī  -tám   |
 bū -tā́m    |               |  bū́ -i-t́is    |  bū -ī  -tā́m   |
 bū -ḿə́     |               |  bū́ -ə-mus    |  bū -ī  -ḿə́    |
 bū -t́ə́     |               |  bū́ -i-t́i     |  bū -ī  -t́ə́    |
 bū -ḗnts   |               |  bū́ -ə-ńt́i    |  bū -ī  -ḗnts  |


This assumes absence of analogy in the thematic vowel, which of course only affects the subjunctive, which becomes the future. Factoring this in gives the following: (using - for hiatus, tho Greek and Latin are both mostly fine with that, so it can just as well be left in)

Code:
Pres Indic  . Impf Indic    . Subj          . Opt            . Imper
  ḗmi       |   yə́sum       |  yə́sō         |   śḗ-m         |
  yə́śi      |   yə́s         |  yə́śiśi       |   śḗ-s         |   yə́s,   źd́í
  yə́śt́i     |   yə́st        |  yə́śit́i       |   śḗ-t         |   yə́stu
  swás      |   śẃə́         |  yə́suwas      |   śiẃə́         | 
  śt́ə́s      |   stám        |  yə́śit́is      |   śitám        |   stám
  śt́ə́s      |   stā́m        |  yə́śit́is      |   śitā́m        |   stā́m
  sumás     |   suḿə́        |  yə́sumus      |   śiḿə́         |
  śt́ə́       |   śt́ə́         |  yə́sut́i       |   śit́ə́         |   śt́ə́
  śə́ńt́i     |   sḗnts       |  yə́sənti      |   śi-ḗnts      |   śə́ntu
------------+---------------+---------------+----------------+--------------
 bū́m        |               |  bū́-ō         |  būyḗm         |
 bū́š        |               |  bū́-iśi       |  būyḗs         |
 bū́t        |               |  bū́-it́i       |  būyḗt         |
 būẃə́       |               |  bū́-awas      |  bū-īẃə́        |
 būtám      |               |  bū́-it́is      |  bū-ītám       |
 būtā́m      |               |  bū́-it́is      |  bū-ītā́m       |
 būḿə́       |               |  bū́-əmus      |  bū-īḿə́        |
 būt́ə́       |               |  bū́-it́i       |  bū-īt́ə́        |
 bū-ḗnts    |               |  bū́-əńt́i      |  bū-ī-ḗnts     |

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 02, 2016 2:19 pm 
Smeric
Smeric
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:48 am
Posts: 2144
Location: Britannia
hwhatting wrote:
You get unreduplicated present verbs based on old perfects in both Germanic and Balto-Slavic, although they are rare in both language families. If you make that a more frequent phenomenon, you need to have a look at the semantics.

Actually, there are clear signs that the Germanic preterite-present verbs were originally reduplicated, and were only secondarily dereduplicated as part of the same innovation as what affected the perfect > preterite. Cf. *aiganą "to own", which never displays a zero-grade stem *ig-, pointing to a reconstruction *h₂eh₂óyḱ- ~ *h₂eh₂iḱ-. It's implausible for it to have levelled out the ablaut, given that no other preterite-present does.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 02, 2016 2:23 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Posts: 4545
Location: the Imperial Corridor
The end goal, let's say, is a system like that of Estonian, with a present, an imperfect, a perfect, and a pluperfect tense, and an indicative and a conditional/subjunctive mood. Estonian adds the quotative, but we don't need one, and we could stand to have a future tense as well. An alternative, of course, would be to maintain some sort of perfective/imperfective distinction in the present and past tense.

In the first option, the perfect can come from the aorist or the stative (or both), and the imperfect and pluperfect will have to be innovated somehow. (Italic seems to accomplish this by grafting *bhuH- onto the verb.) In the second option, if the aorist and the stative don't fall together as in Italic, the present (with the secondary endings, which generalize to the whole paradigm) could become the present imperfective, the aorist could become the present perfective, and the stative could become a generalized past tense, which could be pushed into one aspect or the other as a new one is innovated.

PIE:
- The present was formed by adding the primary endings to imperfective verbs.
- The past was formed by adding the secondary endings to imperfective verbs.
- The stative was formed by adding the stative endings to stative verbs.
- The perfective was formed by adding the secondary endings to perfective verbs.
- The subjunctive mood was formed by adding [a new copy of, if it already existed] the thematic vowel with the primary endings.

Pre-Proto-Pannonian:
- The primary/secondary distinction collapsed in the imperfective verbs, with the secondary endings generally dominating.
- The perfective became (as in Greek) the unmarked aorist.
- The stative became a generalized past tense for the strong verbs. A weak verb past tense is innovated from *weh2dh-, in the present tense. (cf. Germanic *dʰé~dʰeh₁.)
- The subjunctive [or the desiderative] became the future tense.
- However, the copula retained the present stems, and *yə́sum retained a past meaning.
This left a system of present / aorist / past / future. Eventually, the aorist drifted into a present meaning, which pushed the present into the imperfective aspect. The development of an aspectual distinction in the present created pressure for an aspectual distinction in the past, so the stative became a past perfective and a past imperfective was innovated by grafting *yə́sum onto the end of the verb, similarly to the Latin imperfect.

Proto-Pannonian:
- The present perfective descends from the PIE aorist.
- The present imperfective descends from the PIE present/imperfect, with the secondary endings, except in the first person.
- The past perfective descends from the PIE stative [in the strong verbs] or *weh2dh- [in the weak verbs].
- The past imperfective descends from the PIE *h1és-m conjugation of the copula.
- The future makes no aspectual distinction, and descends from either the desiderative or the subjunctive depending on which one I like better.

So, redoing the above charts:
Code:
Prs Pfv < Aor         . Prs Ipfv < Prs Sec  . Pst Pfv < Stat       . Pst Ipfv < h1esm       . Subj                     . Desid
wḗyd-s-mi wḗyd-s-mos  | wéyd-o-h2 wéyd-o-me | wóyd-h2e     wid-mé  | wéyd-yəsum  wéyd-suḿə  | wéyd-o-o-h2 wéyd-o-o-mos | wéyd-s-o-h2 wéyd-s-o-mos
wḗyd-s-si wḗyd-s-te   | wéyd-e-s  wéyd-o-te | wóyd-(s)th2e wid-é   | wéyd-yəs    wéyd-śt́ə   | wéyd-e-e-si wéyd-o-o-te  | wéyd-s-e-si wéyd-s-o-te
wḗyd-s-ti wḗyd-s-nti  | wéyd-e-t  wéyd-o-nt | wóyd-e       wid-ḗr  | wéyd-yət    wéyd-sḗnts | wéyd-e-e-ti wéyd-o-o-nt  | wéyd-s-e-ti wéyd-s-o-nti
----------------------+---------------------+----------------------+------------------------+--------------------------+-------------------------
wḗyc-s-mi wḗyc-s-mus  | wḗyc-o-:  wḗyc-u-mi | wṓyc-a       wīc-mé  | wḗyc-yəsum  wḗyc-suḿə  | wḗyc-o-o-:  wḗyc-o-o-mus | wéyc-s-o-:  wéyc-s-u-mus
wḗyc-s-si wḗyc-s-ti   | wḗyc-i-s  wḗyc-u-ti | wóyc-(s)ta   wīc-é   | wḗyc-yəs    wḗyc-śt́ə   | wḗyc-e-e-si wḗyc-o-o-ti  | wéyc-s-i-si wéyc-s-u-ti
wḗyc-s-ti wḗyc-s-unti | wḗyc-i-t  wḗyc-u-nt | wṓyc-i       wīc-ḗr  | wḗyc-yət    wḗyc-sḗnts | wḗyc-e-e-ti wḗyc-o-o-nt  | wéyc-s-i-ti wéyc-s-u-nti
----------------------+---------------------+----------------------+------------------------+--------------------------+-------------------------
wḗyc-s-mi wḗyc-s-mus  | wḗyc-o-:  wḗyc-u-mi | wṓyc-a       wīć-myə́ | wḗyć-əsum   wḗyc-suḿə  | wḗyc-o-o-:  wḗyc-o-o-mus | wéyc-s-o-:  wéyc-s-u-mus
wḗyc-s-śi wḗyc-s-t́i   | wḗyć-i-s  wḗyc-u-t́i | wóyc-(s)ta   wīć-yə́  | wḗyć-əs     wḗyc-śt́ə   | wḗyc-e-e-śi wḗyc-o-o-t́i  | wéyc-ś-i-śi wéyc-s-u-t́i
wḗyc-s-t́i wḗyc-s-əńt́i | wḗyć-i-t  wḗyc-ə-nt | wṓyć-i       wīc-ḗr  | wḗyć-ət     wḗyc-sḗnts | wḗyc-e-e-t́i wḗyc-o-o-nt  | wéyc-ś-i-t́i wéyc-s-ə-ńt́i
----------------------+---------------------+----------------------+------------------------+--------------------------+-------------------------
    -zmi      -smus   |     -ō        -umi  |  P  -a         y-myə́ |    Y-əsum       -suḿə  |     -ō          -ōmus    |     -sō         -sumus
    -śśi      -śt́i    |    y-is       -ut́i  |  P  -sta       y-ə́   |    Y-əs         -śt́ə   |     -ēśi        -ōt́i     |     -śiśi       -sut́i
    -śt́i      -səńt́i  |    y-it       -ənt  |  P y-i          -ḗr  |    Y-ət         -sḗnts |     -ēt́i        -ōnt     |     -śit́i       -səńt́i


The future will be descended from the subjunctive, which has the merit of being the least hideous conjugation in this mess.

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 02, 2016 4:48 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Posts: 4545
Location: the Imperial Corridor
Since initial sibilants of conjugational endings are lost after *s- *d-, since the *-s- of *-s-mi and *-s-mus will be mostly lost due to the eimi rule, and since endings beginning in *-t will produce *-s t- when attached to roots ending in a dental plosive, it may be justifiable to lose all the initial sibilants. An alternative would be to lose all *s sometime after either RUKI or palatalization. *-nti could also reduce irregularly to *-nt, as it did(?) in Latin. This produces much less hideous conjugations, so is preferable to the extent that it's realistic, although it creates obvious issues with the present perfective. The Winter's Law alternations (note that WL operates through resonants in PP) will remain, and possibly analogize throughout the verb paradigms to resolve the aforementioned issues, meaning that the root vowel of the present imperfective would always be long. The merger of the subjunctive and the present imperfective in the first-person singular can be solved by analogy of the subjunctive to -ē. So the basic conjugation is:
Code:
-(:)mi -(:)mus | W -ō  W-umi  | OW-a  ZWY-myə́ | Y-əsum -umyə | W-ē    W-ōmus
-yi    -tyi    | Wy-is W-utyi | O -ta ZWY-ə́   | Y-əs   -tyə  | W-ēsyi W-ōtyi 
-tyi   -ənt    | Wy-it W-ənt  | OW-e  ZW -er  | Y-ət   -ḗnts | W-ētyi W-ōnt   

It would still be preferable to make the aorist endings less ugly, which can be accomplished by adding a linking vowel. Since there's already one form descended from the copula, we'll apply analogy on the model of the present indicative copula, which produces -ēmi -əsyi -ətyi -umas/-umus -tyi -ənt. Winter's law behaves unusually in the past perfective, but since we've already analogized it out to cover all verbs in the present imperfective, we can just as well lose it there, where it serves no contrastive function.

So, this time with better palatal notation:

Code:
W-ēmi  -umus | W -ō  W-umi | O-a  ZY-myə́ | Y-əsum  -uḿə  | W-ē   W-ōmus
W-əśi y-ći   | Wy-is W-ući | O-ta ZY-ə́   | Y-əs   y-ćə   | W-ēśi W-ōći 
W-əći  -ənt  | Wy-it W-ənt | O-e  Z -er  | Y-ət    -ḗnts | W-ēći W-ōnt   


At this stage in the history of the Pannonian language, and keeping in mind that the subjunctive, passive, participles, and verbal noun/infinitive haven't been handled yet, verbs have the following root forms:
* the basic form (-), derived from the e-grade, used for the present perfective, the present imperfective plural, and the past imperfective
* the lengthened form (W-), derived from the e-grade with analogical application of Winter's law, used for the present imperfective singular and the subjunctive
* the O-form (O-), derived from the o-grade, used for the past perfective singular
* the Z-form (Z-), derived from the zero-grade, used for the past perfective plural

These combine with three grades of mutation on the final consonant:
* the basic grade (-), used by default
* the weakly palatalized grade (y-), used for the second- and third-person singulars of the present imperfective (where the suffix begins with -i), and the second-person plural of the present perfective and the past imperfective (where the suffix begins with a palatalized consonant)
* the strongly palatalized grade (Y-), used for the singulars of the past imperfective and the first- and second-person plurals of the present imperfective (where the suffix begins with -y or a palatalized peripheral consonant)

It may be worthwhile to work out derived verbs next, to see if there's a different / more common pattern in the present perfective that can be generalized to produce a linking vowel.

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 02, 2016 5:52 pm 
Smeric
Smeric

Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2002 2:49 am
Posts: 2316
Location: Bonn, Germany
KathTheDragon wrote:
Actually, there are clear signs that the Germanic preterite-present verbs were originally reduplicated, and were only secondarily dereduplicated as part of the same innovation as what affected the perfect > preterite. Cf. *aiganą "to own", which never displays a zero-grade stem *ig-, pointing to a reconstruction *h₂eh₂óyḱ- ~ *h₂eh₂iḱ-. It's implausible for it to have levelled out the ablaut, given that no other preterite-present does.

Some of them probably were reduplicated, some of them perhaps weren't. Germanic shows both reduplicated and unreduplicated perfects, and I am not convinced that all the unreduplicated ones are due to loss of reduplication. I think that the spread of reduplication from a few verbs where it was original to all perfects was a secondary step on the way from an old stative / H2-conjugation towards the perfect. That's why Anatolian doesn't have the type and peripheral languages like Germanic and Balto-Slavic either don't show the reduplicated type (B-Sl) or have both reduplicated and unreduplicated perfects (Germanic ). In those languages where all perfects became reduplicated, *woydH2e "know" is the only remnant of the unreduplicated perfects because it was integrated into the present system. In a similar way, the surviving perfect-present verbs in Slavic show no reduplication - either the perfect as a separate category never arose there or it was lost, leaving only those verbs that never acquired reduplication because they were sorted into the present tense system, like mog-, which is parallel to Germanic mag.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 354 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group