Re: preliminary conjugation in ju:dajca

On Tue, 11 Jan 2000 16:50:43 -0500 Padraic Brown
<pbrown@...> writes:
> On Tue, 11 Jan 2000, Steg Belsky wrote:
> >AMÂL  (to love)  [a'mAl]  <  amâre
> >(active)
> >amô  ['amow]  <  ámô
> >amâ  ['amA]  <  ámâs
> >ama  ['ama]  <  ámat
> >amâmus  [a'mAmuS]  <  amâmus
> Oo, another one that keeps [u].
> >amâti  [a'mAsi]  <  amâtis
> >aman  ['aman]  <  ámant
> >(passive)
> >amo  ['amo]  <  ámor
> >amâri  [a'mAri]  <  amâris
> >amâtu  [a'mAsu]  <  amâtur
> >amâmul  [a'mAmul]  <  amâmur
> >amâmîn  [amA'mijn]  <  amâmínî
> >amant  [a'mant(@)]  <  amántur
> Tres cool! J keeps the whole passive?  Everyone else dumped these;
> and
> even Kernu only keeps a couple as impersonal forms. Is there some
> kind
> of adstrate influence at work (i.e., do Hebrew or Aramaic have
> passives)?
> Pretty neat.
> Padraic.
.

Thanks!  Yup, it's adstrate influence.  Hebrew has three-and-two-halves
passives (simple passive, passive-intensive, passive-causative, as well
as adjectival present simple and reflexive-passive past), and Aramaic has
at least one paradigm (itpa`al) which is either a true passive or a
reflexive-passive.

Did i get the original Latin accented syllables right?  What do you think
about the 1st and 4th person 'problems'?


-Stephen (Steg)
 "repeat after me:  maçtâl. maçtô, maçtâ, maçta..."