Re: CHAT: History of «ir»

--- R A Brown <ray@...> wrote:

> Elliott Lash wrote:
> > The Latin is:
> >
> > I.  vado vadere vasi vasum  (3rd conjugation)
>
> Are the perfect and supine actually attested? The
> 'Lewis & Short'
> dictionary gives only: vado, vadere. Thus according
> to the dictionary it
> existed only in 'present stem' (infectum) forms. If
> there were a supine
> one would expect it to be *vasum. But there would be
> other possibilities
> for the perfect. Are forms derived from *vasi
> actually attested?
> (Genuine question)
Well, I think that the forms <vasi> and <vasum>, if
not technically attested for the simple verb, are for
compounds:
   invado, invadere, invasi, invasum
   evado, evadere, evasi, evasum

Perhaps that's where my source got the forms <vasi,
vasum>.
 -Elliott




____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who knows.
Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545433

Reply