HISTORICAL GRAMMAR OF OLD PRUSSIAN

HISTORICAL GRAMMAR OF OLD PRUSSIAN
Baltic languages (Lithuanian, Latvian). Athematic verbs ended in Pr. -t
(< *-ti): ast ‘is’ (= Lith. …esti), çit ‘goes’ (= Lith. dial. eµt, Latv. i°et 90 ), d`st
‘gives’ (= OLith. duosti).
Forms of the 3rd person are extended with the formant -ts sometimes:
astits ‘ist es’, pt. bill`ts ‘spoke’ etc. This -ts seems to have come
from WBalt. pron. *tas, used anaphorically. See Stang Vergl. Gr. 410,
cf. Endzelîns SV 105 91 .
* 210. 1 pers. pl. is attested with the morph -mai (see ** 206,
207) in all types of stems. e.g.: asmai ‘we are’ perçimai ‘we come’,
giwammai ‘we live’, l`ikumai ‘we keep’, turrimai ‘we have’.
* 211. 2 pers. pl. possesses morphs -ti (ca. 80x; spelled also -ty),
-tei (9x), -tai (8x), -te (4x), -ta (1x), e.g. asti, estei, astei ‘ye are’, seiti ‘be!’,
laikûtai ‘ye keep’ (in imperative sense), turriti ‘have!’, immaiti ‘take!’, edeitte
‘eat!’, nidrausieiti ‘do not forbid!’, rikauite ‘dominate!’, seggîta ‘do!’. The
morph -te seems to have appeared on place of -tei 92 . The latter has its -tei
in accordance with pattern 2 sg -sei, while -ai in -tai came from 1 pl. -mai;
the spelling -ta (1x) seems to be a mistake. For all this cf. Endzelîns SV
105 f. with bibl. The most frequent (ca. 80x) -ti is authentic < Pr. *-tç
(Endzelîns l. c.) < Balt. *-tç (> Lith.-Latv. *-tç > -te) 93 .
90 Here Latvian acute differs from Lithuanian and Prussian circumflex. – L.P.
91 If (asti)-ts = (ist) es, why (imma)-ts = (nahm) er ? What anaphora can be seen in nostan kai
tans sparts astits prei paskulîton (III 87 10 ) = auff das er mechtig sey zu ermanen ? Why is
anaphoric *tas used in the nominative when corresponds to a direct object: limatz bha daits I 136
– nom. ‘he’ or acc. ‘it (= es)’? (Cf. : “took bread and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it” Math 26
: 26). In all instances -ts occurs only when something is narrated. For Pr. (Cat.) -ts as a mark of
narration (relative mood), as well as for an alternative view of its origin, cf. Borussica 2 in Baltistica
XXV (2) 128–132. – L.P.
92 Here V. Maþiulis de facto recognizes alternation Pr. (Cat.) -ei / -e (cf. ftn's 12, 23, 27, 39, 43, 89,
109). – L.P.
93 V. Maþiulis’ samples show 2 pl. -ti being typical for the imperative mood. Balt. 2 pl. *-tç was
possibly ousted from the indicative by innovative *-tei. If the latter had been really accomodated
to 2 sg. Balt. *-ei, not necessarily to athem. *-sei, its diphthong could occasionally provoce
diphthongization of 1 pl. too (for *-tei cf. EBaltic facts, ftn. 89). As for spellings -tai, -ta, they
may reflect Pr. (Cat.) *-t’ai / *-t’a (= *-tei / *-te) without the letter i as usual mark of palatalization
( o-tiai, o-tia). – L.P.
85