19.06.2013 Views

THE STRONG PERFECTS IN THE ROMANCE ... - Page ON

THE STRONG PERFECTS IN THE ROMANCE ... - Page ON

THE STRONG PERFECTS IN THE ROMANCE ... - Page ON

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

(Mon.), seppi/sappi, OIt., Sic. potti, Umbr. poddi, Cors. pobbi, volli,<br />

valli (Dar., p. 80, Rohlfs, §582), but always with the arrhizotonic forms<br />

formed on the root, as giacesti, avesti, tenesti, OIt. venesti (now venisti<br />

with the i of venire), except in Old Aquilan, Old Roman and other old<br />

dialectal forms such as cappissero, hábbera/(h)ábera (condit.), ebbesti,<br />

appisse, sappessemo, dippisse, plaquesse, iacquesse, pótteri, pótera,<br />

tennesse, sosténnera, vennesse, convénnera. We have already seen that<br />

compared with the possible primitive Latin type Italian differs in having<br />

a strong form 6 also, as ebbero, and the same situation is found also in<br />

form 4 in the dialects, which have forms like ébbimo/ábbimo/áppimu,<br />

sáppimu, póttimu, tínnimu, vínnimu (Dar., p. 96, following Rohlfs, §566),<br />

with which can be compared Sard. appimus, that is, the rhizotonic forms<br />

are all strong. The same position is found dialectally in the -si perfects,<br />

and here the antiquity of a form like díssimo seems to be corroborated by<br />

ORum. zísemŭ, and cf. Sard. lessimus; furthermore these forms agree<br />

with the accentuation of Lat. hábuimus (late), díximus, and seem clearly<br />

to be strongholds of resistance against the tendency to change to<br />

arrhizotonic form 4. As regards the forms like ebbesti, sappessemo,<br />

iacquesse, opinions differ, some explaining them as being formed on the<br />

analogy of the strong forms, but I myself do not see why we cannot<br />

allow a continuation of the classical Latin state of affairs. After all,<br />

especially in the case of the imperfect subjunctive, if forms like giacessi<br />

once become established, there is little reason for them to be associated<br />

with giacqui, as the imperfect subjunctive has no semantic connection<br />

with the preterite and tends to be associated rather with the present<br />

subjunctive, as in Catalan above all, where the stems interact. In most<br />

cases — and this applies to ébbimo too — once the weak form is established,<br />

there is no return to the strong form, and in fact in some areas avesti has<br />

led to avei, avé, averono. Anyway, we will return to this problem of the<br />

18

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!