Azalic: Difference between revisions

IlL (talk | contribs)
mNo edit summary
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
IlL (talk | contribs)
mNo edit summary
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
Line 161: Line 161:


The different forms were:
The different forms were:
*Imperative (source of English imperative and subjunctive): non-past without any endings
*Imperative (source of English imperative): non-past without any endings
*Nonpast (the source of the English present): e-grade or otherwise the unmarked form of the verb
*Nonpast (the source of the English present): e-grade or otherwise the unmarked form of the verb
*Past: PIE reduplicated perfect or root aorist
*Past: PIE reduplicated perfect or root aorist
*Irrealis (source of the English subjunctive ''were''): sigmatic future.
*Irrealis (source of the English subjunctive, including ''were''): sigmatic future.
*Stative (the source of the English past): a tenseless form like the Akkadian stative. Originally a deverbal noun; formed with the o-grade (deriving nouns in PIE) for strongs, -d from -tús for weaks, (i)-ə from -ih2 for semistrongs. It was not a true finite verb form so it didn't take ''-se''.
*Stative (the source of the English past): a tenseless form like the Akkadian stative. Originally a deverbal noun; formed with the o-grade (deriving nouns in PIE) for strongs, -d from -tús for weaks, (i)-ə from -ih2 for semistrongs. It was not a true finite verb form so it didn't take ''-se''.
**Modal verbs such as ''can, will, shall, may, must, ought'' are stative-present verbs.
**Modal verbs such as ''can, will, shall, may, must, ought'' are stative-present verbs.