Talk:Preterite-present verb

Past Participle / Supine
The Swedish distinction between past participles and supines makes things muddled. According to http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/veta, the past participle is "veten", but to me, as a native speaker, it looks quite weird, and is, if it even exists, at least extremely rare. 惑乱 分からん 15:03, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Examples?
What happened to English examples that make this phenomenon clear?

Relation to Latin defective verbs (memini, odi)
The concept expressed here sounds similar to Latin defective verbs, where the grammatical perfect has a present meaning, even if the perfect did not evolve into a present: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defective_verb#Latin. Can these phenomena be traced back to the same Indo-European feature which you describe here? Disclaimer: I'm no linguist, just knowledgeable of Latin and curious. --Blaisorblade (talk) 03:01, 3 October 2010 (UTC)


 * It certainly is a parallel phenomenon. It is not CALLED preterite-present, but that may just be a question of traditions of grammatical analysis. What makes it look particularly similar is that the semantic development works: a verb meaning "I knew" could easily take on the sense "I remember", and the root *men is well attested meaning "be aware". But since these seem to be post-PIE developments, it would be better to say it is parallel rather than identical.