8,514
edits
Lifashian: Difference between revisions
m
→Aorist and Perfect
m (→Verbs) |
|||
| Line 899: | Line 899: | ||
Aorists have two sets of endings, diachronically derived from the same ones depending on whether the initial laryngeal of the suffix is kept (cf. ''tistáhe'' (< *stestóh₂h₂e) and ''lelóba'' (< *lelowbʰh₂e)). | Aorists have two sets of endings, diachronically derived from the same ones depending on whether the initial laryngeal of the suffix is kept (cf. ''tistáhe'' (< *stestóh₂h₂e) and ''lelóba'' (< *lelowbʰh₂e)). | ||
The perfect is a more recent formation. It is formed with a generalized past participle in ''-it'' (''-t'' for vowel-ending roots), formed starting from a past verb (with exceptions), and the appropriate form of the present copula: | The perfect is a more recent formation. It is formed with a generalized past participle in ''-it'' (''-t'' for vowel-ending roots)<ref>Other participle forms did not survive as verbal forms, although there are traces in Lifashian. The present active participle ended up being the nominalizing derivational suffix ''-éc'' (< *-ent-s), while the *-wo-s past active participle remains in some nouns as well as in relic adverbs or expressions such as ''mé hentibúwot'' "despite" (''-wot'' being a relic proto-Lifashian ablative *-wōt, a case that disappeared from modern Lifashian).</ref>, formed starting from a past verb (with exceptions), and the appropriate form of the present copula: | ||
* ''Mek tom filmom gilémi.'' "I see the film" (present); ''mek tom filmom lersyit (e)syim.'' "I have seen the film" | * ''Mek tom filmom gilémi.'' "I see the film" (present); ''mek tom filmom lersyit (e)syim.'' "I have seen the film" | ||