Who's right? (Latin future in -b-)

[Guy Deutscher]

----------------------------Original message----------------------------
Dear Histlingers,

In Linguistic accounts (e.g. Fleischman (1982)The future in thought and 
language, p.34), the Latin future in -bo, -bis etc. is presented as 
deriving from the grammaticalisation of the verb *bh(w)u/*bheu 
('be', 'become'), which merged with the stem: ama + bhwo > amabo. This 
origin is presented as a fact, or at the very least, as an entirely 
secure and incontrovertible reconstruction. In the grammaticalization 
literature, this development almost seems to have become a showcase 
example, e.g. Hopper and Traugott 1993, p.9, but also in many other 
places. Again, the derivation from an auxiliary *bheu is generally 
described as a fact.

Since this is what I 'grew up' on, I was alarmed to find recently that 
Indo-Europeanists are much less convinced. For example, Pisani (Storia 
della Lingua Latina, 1962, p.108) doesn't seem to have any doubts that 
*bheu cannot be the source of the Latin future: "Ma non detto che il -b-
 latino risalga qui a -bh-, certo esso non ha nulla a vedere con la 
radice *bheu....".  Szemerényi (Introduction to Indo-European 
Lingsuitics, 4h ed. OUP, 1996, p.287, note 1) is less categorical, but 
makes it clear that he believes the *bheu theory to have been 
superseded in recent times by the suggestion that the formation derives 
from a desiderative -su-. ("The Latin b-future... was for a long time 
traced back to an Italo-Celtic formation with -bh(w)o,.... but in 
recent times..." )

Not being an Indo-Europeanist, I can't judge the plausibility of the 
arguments presented, and so would be grateful for advice on how we 
should regard this example:

1) Are the arguments of the Indo-Europeanists silly, and so to be 
ignored, and we can happily go on propagating the *bheu origin as a 
fact or at least secure reconstruction?

2) Are the arguments of the Indo-Europeanists not silly, but we should 
ignore them anyway, just because it's a pity to let go of such a nice 
example of grammaticalization?

3) Are their arguments convincing, and so we should find another 
example?

I would be very grateful for any help...

Guy Deutscher.