Latin mecum, tecum, etc.

[Lionel Bonnetier]

Douglas G Kilday wrote:

> It's much more plausible to regard -cum as the remnant of a formerly
> widespread postpositive use of prepositions (sorry, I don't know how to
> avoid this oxymoron).

But the trickiest question was: Why did "cum" remain
a postposition while all other adpositions became
prepositions in Latin? (And why only with pronouns?)

> This usage is preserved better in p-Italic: e.g.
> Umbrian <ukriper fisiu tutaper ikuvina> 'pro arce Fisia pro civitate
> Iguvina', Oscan <vibieisen beriieis> 'in Vibiis Beriis'. Similarly, in Epic
> Greek many prepositions may follow their objects, but in Attic prose only
> <peri> may do so.

Thanks for this survey. The same question comes here
with Attic "peri": Why did it keep the possibility of
being a postposition while no other adpositions did?