8

Usually it is assumed that in PIE the verb forms for the singular first, second, and third person are respectively -m-, -s-, -t- (cfr. Latin).

The personal pronouns, instead, have the second and third person inverted.

Why is this the case? I am no expert, but I thought that personal endings could have formed by agglutination with some forms of personal pronous.

What happened?

My question is very much related to this question.

Community
  • 1
geodude
  • 261
  • 1
  • 5
  • 2
    Well, the paradigm of PIE *so (which is usually considered a demonstrative rather than a personal pronoun, btw) actually has t- instead of s- in all but the m. f. nom. forms, so that at least could easily be related to the 3sg -t in verbs. – TKR Nov 20 '14 at 17:39
  • 1
    Yes, I think consensus is that PIE didn't have third person pronouns ("se" etc is reflexive not third person). But your point about -t- vs t- stands. – Colin Fine Nov 20 '14 at 20:57

1 Answers1

2

It's easy (though of course conjectural) to connect 3sg -t in verbs with the t- of the demonstrative pronoun, which (as I said in my comment) actually only has s- in the masc. and fem. nom. Then the questions become (1) whether this t- has anything to do with the 2sg pronoun tu, and (2) whether the 2sg verbal ending -s has anything to do with the s- of the masc./fem. nom. of the demonstrative pronoun. I suppose a semantic change from second person to third person or vice versa is not impossible, but I would wager that the answer to both questions is no, and the similarities are coincidental.

TKR
  • 10,893
  • 26
  • 60