DICTIONARY OF REVIVED PRUSSIAN:

automatically presumes the existence of the source verb OPr. *terp- ‘to thrive’ which
only at this stage of the analysis may be compared to Lith. tarpti. The semantical
origin of the word OPr. *terp` ‘use, profit’ is therefore ‘a profit obtained from the
abundant (thriven) crop’. This, in turn, is parallel to OPr. *band` ‘a profit obtained
from cattle’ (cf. Lith. banda ‘herd’), which is reconstructed analogously from OPr. ni
enb`ndan ‘useless’ III = OPr. ny anterpinsquan III.
Then a deeper comparison of the OPr. *terp- and Lith. tarp- follows leading to
the conclusion that the verb *terp-/*tarp- must have been Common-Baltic (CB).
Only then does a broader Indoeuropean comparison begin, which is usually the starting
place for all traditional etymologists. Nevertheless, even at this stage V. Maþiulis
first searches for the nearest source of the verb CB *terp-, which must be IE *terp-/
*trp-, but the latter goes back to the root IE *ter- ‘to rub, to perforate (by rubbing)’,
with the extension *-p: ‘to perforate by sprouting’. Now, at the very end (not in the
beginning!), the latter root is compared to many related words from various IE
languages, such as Lith. terpti ‘to squeeze into’, Russian torop ‘one who hurries
squeezing into’, O.Isl. ÿarfr ‘useful’ < ‘properly rubbed’, Skr. t³rpati ‘becomes satisfied
< ‘proper’, Gk. térpô ‘sate, gladden’, Tokh. AB ts`rw- ‘to be glad’, etc.
Obviously, such consequent and deep analysis appeared to be extremely
important for the recovery of Prussian. Not aiming to do this, V. Maþiulis
demonstrated that Old Prussian had possessed the words *terpinisk` (NPr. terpinisku)
‘profitability’, *terpins ‘profitable’, *terp` ‘use, profit’, *terptwei ‘to thrive’, none of
which were attested by any historical monument of this language.
Two sources of the analysis, the words OPr. enterpen III and (ny) anterpinsquan
III, disclosed a chain of three elements in reverse chronological order of the word
building: the Baltic desubstantive suffix -isk(a)- of the secondary derivation of
adjectives which may be substantivized as Prussian abstracts, the Baltic desubstantive
suffix -in(a)- of the secondary derivation of adjectives in Prussian and Baltic, and the
Baltic deverbative stem formant -` of the primary derivation of substantives in Baltic.
7. Defining the inventory of grammatical categories
In the field of morphology, the inventory of grammatical categories for the
standardized language is defined. If a grammatical category is not attested in historical
written monuments of Old Prussian, it is not introduced artificially.
The attested categories correspond to those known in East-Baltic Lithuanian
and Latvian. These categories are: Gender (cf. masc. num., subst. Antars Pallaips
13