[YG Conlang Archives] > [romconlang group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
Hi! Peter Collier writes: > Do all the modern romance langs derive their past participles from the > Latin -ATVS / -ATA / -ATAM etc? > > I'm trying to consider an alternative because 'my' pp ceases to be > distinctive very early on (I lose the final S almost immediately, quickly > followed by the final vowel, so e.g. AMATVS > AMAT by about the year 500 > CE...) >... What exactly is the problem with that? The typical -at- morpheme is still there, just the case inflection dropped. I think that's perfect. It's that -t- that is the sign of that participle (of regular verbs), so if you don't loose it, everything is fine. (French looses it and is still fine...) BTW, in my Terkunan, the ending is -at, so 'amat' is in fact perfect Terkunan. :-) **Henrik