Augment (was Re: German ge- ptcpl cognates?)

[Vidhyanath Rao]

"Miguel Carrasquer Vidal" <mcv at wxs.nl> wrote:

> I don't know to what extent the imperfective (iparras,
> "present/future") was used in past tense contexts.
>  Judging by its traditional name, not often.

When it comes to aspectual questions, IMHO, depending on names is a poor
guide to syntax.

>Come to think of it, Hittite (unlike Akkadian) is quite clear.
>The forms without -i are past tense, those with -i present.

Actually it is not that clear: There have been suggestions (Josephson,
``The role of sentence particles in Old and Middle Hittite'') that
sentence particles had an aspectual role as well. More recent work
(Boley ``Sentence particles and place words in Old and Middle Hittite'')
suggests local meaning overall but `kan' is given a terminative function
for the most part. These need not be mutually exclusive (eg Russian).
The more important question in our context is if there is any difference
between the tenses in sentences/clauses with and without these
particles. I don't know this has been studied (I don't know enough about
Hittite to do it without large doses of guidance.)

BTW, I remember reading that the Hittite `preterit`, in some cases, to
have a performative meaning. I can't find the reference now. Is this
true? [Some examples of RV injunctive may be classified as performative,
eg RV 1.32: indrasya nu vi:rya:n.i pra vocam.]