2. CONJUGATION.
THE FOUR CONJUGATIONS.
137. (1) In Vulgar Latin there were some shifts, the verbs of the second and third conjugations being particularly unstable: cadĕre, capĕre, sapĕre, for instance, often passed into the second, while mŏvēre, rīdēre frequently followed the third, and mŏri, sĕqui usually went into the fourth. Pŏsse, vĕlle, with the new infinitives ✱potēre, ✱volēre, were made to conform with more or less regularity to the second conjugation type. Beside do, dant, sto, stant, there came into use the forms ✱dao, ✱daunt, ✱stao, ✱staunt. Beside facĕre there doubtless existed a verb ✱fare,[102] strongly influenced by dare and stare; the first suggestion of shortening probably came from the monosyllabic imperative singular fac (or fa[103]), which must have led to a plural ✱fate beside facĭte. Habēre and vadĕre[103] also came under the influence of dare and stare; the former adopted, beside habeo, habes, habet, habent, the forms ✱ho, ✱has, ✱hat, ✱hant or ✱haunt. Vadĕre generally lost its past tenses, which were replaced by īre and, in southern Gaul, by annare.[104]
(2) In Provençal the first conjugation was well preserved, and the fourth lost but little. The second and the third lost many verbs (especially learned words) to the fourth: delir, emplir, envazir, espandir, fugir, iauzir, merir, regir, relinquir, reluzir, vertir;[105] cọzer cozir ＜ consuĕre,[106] devire devezir ＜ divīdĕre, dire dir ＜ dīcĕre, lęire legir (also lire lir) ＜ lĕgĕre, quęrre querir ＜ quærĕre, sęgre seguir ＜ sĕqui, tenẹr tenir[107] ＜ tenēre. Moreover, the second and third conjugations, which in Provençal differed practically only in the infinitive, were much confused: cabẹr, cazẹr, mǫrdre, rire, sabẹr; cọrre accorrẹr, mentavẹr mentaure ＜ mente habēre, movẹr mǫure, quęrre querẹr, redẹbre rezemẹr ＜ redĭmĕre. Uc Faidit, a 13th century grammarian, enumerates about 500 verbs in -ar, about 100 in -er and -re, and a little over 100 in -ir.
138. The inchoative ending -scĕre lost its original sense. The -īsc- type, for verbs of the fourth conjugation, was very widely extended, the -isc- becoming a part of the regular present stem of the fourth conjugation, and disappearing from the infinitive: finīre, ✱finīsco ＞ finir, finisc. An obscure substitute for the Latin -ēsc- type produced an ending -eissir -ezir -zir (dis-pigrēscĕre = despereissir, evanēscĕre = envanezir[108]), which was used in forming some new verbs: enfolezir[109] ＜ fǫl, envelhezir ＜ vęlh, envelzir ＜ vil, esclarzir ＜ clar, escürzir ＜ escür oscür, espaorzir ＜ paọr.[110] The -āsc- and -ōsc- types appear in old verbs: irāscĕre ＞ iráisser, co(g)nōscĕre ＞ conọisser.[111]
139. New verbs were formed, in late Vulgar Latin and in Provençal, only in the first and fourth conjugations. The commonest suffixes were -āre, -iāre, -icāre, -idiāre (＜ -ίζειν: § [57], Z), -īre: ✱oblītāre ＞ oblidar, ✱altiāre ＞ aussar, ✱carricāre ＞ cargar, ✱werridiāre ＞ guerreiar, ✱abbellīre ＞ abelir. Germanic verbs generally went into the first conjugation, except those in -jan, most of which entered the fourth: roubôn ＞ raubar (also raubir), wîtan ＞ guidar; furbjan ＞ forbir.
FUNDAMENTAL CHANGES IN INFLECTION.
140. The Latin perfect passive took the sense of a present; amātus est, for instance, under the influence of such phrases as carus est, came to mean ‘he is loved’. This led to the establishment of an entire passive inflection made up of the perfect participle and the parts of the verb ĕsse; and the old passive forms were gradually abandoned, leaving no trace (save the perfect participle and possibly the gerundive) in the Romance languages. So the passive is constructed in Provençal as in French: ẹs amatz, ęra amatz, fọ amatz, será amatz, etc.; the participle regularly agrees with the subject in gender and number. Latin deponent verbs became active: mŏri ＞ morir, sĕqui ＞ seguir.
141. (1) Such phrases as ĭd habeo factum shifted their meaning from ‘I have it done’, etc., to ‘I have done it’, etc. The Latin perfect came to be restricted to its aorist sense, and the perfect was expressed by compounds of habēre with the perfect participle. In the Romance languages all compound tenses were eventually formed in this way: ai cantat, avia cantat, aurai cantat, etc. In Provençal the auxiliary is sometimes ęsser, instead of avẹr, if the main verb is reflexive, passive, or neuter; ęsser is particularly common with neuter verbs of motion: sọi vengütz.[112] A participle used with avẹr may agree in gender and number with the direct object, if there is one: ai cantat or cantada la cansọ.
(2) The Latin perfect indicative continued to be used as an aorist, and is the source of the preterit in Provençal, as in the other Romance languages: vīdī ＞ vi, ‘I saw’. The pluperfect indicative survived in some regions; in Provençal it is used with the sense of a conditional: fŭĕrat ＞ fọra,‘he would be’. The future perfect indicative and the perfect subjunctive did not remain in Provençal: amavĕro = aurai amat, amavĕrim = aia amat. The pluperfect subjunctive assumed the functions of the imperfect, which disappeared from nearly every part of the Romance territory: audīssem (for audīrem) ＞ auzis. The perfect infinitive left no trace: audīsse = avẹr auzit.
142. The Latin future, which was not uniform in the four conjugations, and, in the third and fourth, was liable to confusion with the present subjunctive, was gradually replaced by various periphrastic constructions: instead of faciam people said factūrus sum, dēbeo facĕre, vŏlo facĕre, habeo (ad) facĕre, etc. The construction that prevailed in the greater part of the Empire was facĕre habeo, a combination of the infinitive with the present indicative of habēre. The verb ĕsse was the only one that ultimately retained the old future beside the new: Pr. ęr, ęrs, ęr, beside serái serás será; in the plural, only serẹm, serẹtz, serán. The new composite future was occasionally used by Tertullian, St. Jerome, and St. Augustine, and became common in Italy by the 6th century.[113]
(2) As an imperfect of the future, there was evolved a combination of the infinitive and the imperfect or perfect indicative. To correspond to dīcit quod venīre habet, was constructed dīxit quŏd venīre habēbat (or habuit); to match sī pŏssum, venīre habeo, was made sī potuĭssem, venīre habēbam (or habuī). In Gaul, as in most of the Empire, only the imperfect of habēre was used for this purpose. Traces of such a construction are found as early as the 3d century. This form is generally called the conditional, and it existed in Provençal side by side with the conditional described in § [141], (2): sería, serías, sería, etc., beside fọra, fọras, fọra, etc. The Romance languages developed also a perfect conditional: auría agüt = ‘I should have had’.
143. (1) The present participle remained in use as an adjective: fīlias placentes ＞ filhas plazẹns; cf. § [101], (3). In its verbal function it was replaced by the ablative of the gerund: vĕnit accŭrrens ＞ vĕnit accŭrrendo ＞ ven acorrẹn. In most Provençal dialects, however, the present participle and the gerund coincided in form (amantem and amando both ＞ amán), the gerund being distinguished from the participle only by its lack of inflection: see § [76], (2).
(2) The gerund retained only the ablative case, the use of which was considerably extended: see above. In its other cases it was replaced by the infinitive: artem dīcendī ＞ artem dīcĕre ＞ art de dire. The supine, too, was replaced by the infinitive: vīsum vĕnit nōs ＞ vĕnit nōs vĭdēre ＞ ven nọs (a) vezẹr.
INFINITIVE, PRESENT PARTICIPLE, AND GERUND.
144. The infinitive endings -āre, -ēre, -īre regularly became -ar, -ẹr, -ir; -ĕre became -re or -er: see § [48], (1) and § [52], (1). Ex.: amāre ＞ amár, vĭdēre ＞ vezẹr, audīre ＞ auzir; tŏllĕre ＞ tǫlre, nascĕre ＞ náisser, dīcere ＞ dire dízer. For shifts of conjugation, see § [137].
1. The fourth conjugation verbs enantir, gauzir, grazir, murir, servir sometimes took a final e by the analogy of devire (＜ divīdĕre), dire, rire. On the other hand, dire occasionally lost its -e by the analogy of the fourth conjugation. Lire for leire (＜ lĕgĕre) is probably French, and lir is to be explained like dir.
2. Far beside faire doubtless comes from ✱fare = facĕre: see § [137], (1). Trar beside traire (＜ ✱tragĕre) follows far.
3. Escriure (＜ scrībĕre) sometimes became escrire through the analogy of dire.
4. Some verbs that passed from the second to the third conjugation preserved the old infinitive as a noun: debēre ＞ deure devér, placēre ＞ plaire plazér.
145. The endings -antem -ando, -ĕntem -ĕndo regularly became -an or -ant, -en or -ent: § [76], (2). See § [143], (1). The endings -iĕntem -iĕndo lost their i in Vulgar Latin (§ [40], 1), and were thus reduced to -entem -endo. Ex.: amantem amando ＞ amán (or amánt), vidĕntem vidĕndo ＞ vezén (or vezént), credĕntem credĕndo ＞ crezén (or crezént); sapiĕntem sapiĕndo ＞ ✱sapĕntem ✱sapĕndo ＞ sabén (or sabént), partiĕntem partiĕndo ＞ ✱partentem ✱partendo ＞ partén (or partént). Fourth conjugation verbs which adopted the inchoative -sc- (§ [138]), generally introduced it into the present participle and the gerund: florir, florissẹn. Cf. § [155]. For the declension of the present participle, see § [101], (3).
PAST PARTICIPLE.
146. The Provençal past participle comes from the Latin perfect participle. It is to be noted that verbs which originally had no perfect participle were obliged to create one in order to form their compound tenses: see § [141], (1). Past participles in Provençal, when inflected, were declined like bęl: §§ [102]; [102], 1; [103], (1). See § [141], (1).
147. In the first and fourth conjugations the endings were -ātum and -ītum, which regularly became -at and -it: cantātum ＞ cantát, finītum ＞ fenít. The first conjugation verbs which had a form in -ĭtum discarded it for -ātum: crepāre crĕpĭtum = crebár crebát. On the other hand, aperīre and operīre preserved their participle in -ĕrtum: cubrir (＜ cooperīre), cubęrt (also cubrít); ubrír (＜ aperīre + cooperīre), ubęrt. By the analogy of these, sufrir (＜ suffĕrre) and ufrir (＜ offĕrre) have sufęrt (also sufrít), ufęrt. Tenẹr tenir keeps its Provençal second conjugation ending, tengüt (see § [148]); and venir, following the analogy of tenir, has vengüt.
148. (1) Most Latin verbs of the second and third conjugations had no accented ending, but a few had an ending -ūtum, which corresponded very well to the -ātum and -ītum of the first and fourth: arguĕre, argūtum; consuĕre, consūtum; sĕqui, secūtum; solvĕre, solūtum; volvĕre, volūtum. This ending was considerably extended in Vulgar Latin, especially to verbs having a perfect in -ŭī: habēre, habŭī, habĭtum ✱habūtum. In Provençal it spread still further: cazẹr, cazęc, cazegüt. Inasmuch as it was closely associated with the perfect, it came to be attached, more and more frequently, to the stem of that tense.
(2) Of the Provençal verbs of the second and third conjugations, about half adopted the ending -üt. In some the -üt is added to the stem of the infinitive: crezüt, defendüt, escondüt, molüt, perdüt, resemüt, respondüt, rompüt, vendüt, vezüt veüt. Most of the verbs, however, attach the -üt to the stem of the preterit: nasc, nascüt; pasc, pascüt; tems, temsüt; tesc, tescüt, venc, vencüt (from vẹnser); visc, viscüt. A few have both forms: agüt avüt; cazegüt cazüt; vengüt venüt. It is to be noted, in the case of verbs that add -üt to the preterit, that if the third person singular of the preterit ends in a voiceless consonant preceded by a vowel or l or n, that consonant is voiced in the participle: ac, agüt; bẹc, begüt; cazęc, cazegüt; conọc, conogüt; crẹc, cregüt; dẹc, degüt; elęc, elegüt; mǫc, mogüt; nǫc, nogüt; plac, plagüt, plǫc, plogüt; pǫc, pogüt; remas, remazüt; saup, saubüt; sęc, següt; tẹnc, tengüt; tǫlc, tolgüt; valc, valgüt; vẹnc, vengüt (from venir); vǫlc, volgüt. Exceptions are ceupüt, saupüt (beside saubüt), and vencüt (from vẹnser): for ceupüt, saupüt, cf. § [65], P, 3; in vencüt the c was perhaps kept to distinguish the word from vengüt (venir).
(3) The other half of the second and third conjugation verbs generally preserved the old participle with no accented ending: ars, cẹing, claus, dich, düit, estrẹit, fach, iọinch, mẹs, ọnh, pǫst, prẹs, trach, etc. Some of these have also forms in -üt: defẹs defendüt, elig eslęit elegüt, escọs escondüt, mǫut molüt, nat nascüt, remas remazüt, rọt rompüt, vis vezüt. A few verbs made up new forms without a stressed ending: conquęrre, conquẹs conquis; redemer rezemer, redems (rezemüt); sọrger, sọrs; tǫlre, tǫlt tǫut; vezẹr, vist (vis vezüt veüt); vǫlvre, vǫut. Mĭttĕre probably had beside mĭssum a form ✱mīsum (cf. mīsī); hence mẹtre, mẹs mis. By the analogy of this, prendre has beside prẹs a form pris. ęstre borrowed estát from estar ＜ stare. Escriut, from escriure, is probably influenced by the infinitive; escrich follows dich. So, probably, does elig = eslęit, from elegir eslire eslir.
1. For sọi agütz (= ai estat), which is found not only in some Provençal dialects, but also in southeastern France, French Switzerland, and parts of northern Italy, see § [141], (1), footnote 1.
FUTURE AND NEW CONDITIONAL.
149. For the formation of these parts, see § [142], (1), (2). Ex.: amarái, creisserái, florirái. Verbs of the second conjugation regularly, and verbs of the fourth very often, syncopate the e or i of the infinitive: remanrái, volrás; partrái, venría. Third conjugation infinitives with final e drop this e before the ending; those in -er keep the e: vẹndre, vendrái; náisser, naisserái. First conjugation infinitives regularly keep the a (§ [45]), but in a few texts (especially the Girart and the Rasos de trobar) the a is changed to e: cantarái, sonaría, trobarẹm; blasmerán, comterá.
1. Esser keeps the old future forms er, ers, er, beside serái, serás, será (serém, serétz, serán).
150. For the phonetic changes exemplified in auría, deurái, mourá; plairía; cairá, veirái; valdrái; remandrém, tendría; poiría, see § [70], βr, C´r, Dr, Lr, Nr, Tr. Anar (＜ annāre) has beside anarái a form irái from ir (＜ īre). ęsser drops its first syllable (serái), perhaps through elision (tu ’sserás, etc.), perhaps in accordance with the general principle stated in § [19]. Faire far always makes its future and conditional from the latter form (farái). Sabẹr has beside sabrái a form saubrái, due no doubt to the combined influence of aurái and the preterit saup ＜ sapuit. Vezẹr, following the analogy of beurái, deurái, viurái, has veurái beside the regular veirái.
151. The composite nature of the future and conditional was still sufficiently felt, in the literary period, to admit of the separation of the component parts: amar vos ái, dar n’ẹtz, donar lo t’ái, tornar nos ẹm, tornar s’en ía.
Future Endings.
152. For the 1st pers. sg., the Provençal verb used the form ✱ayo ＞ ai (§ [73], βy); for the 2d and 3d pers. sg. and the 3d pers. pl., the forms ✱has ＞ as, ✱hat ＞ a (§ [82], T), ✱hant ✱haunt ＞ an aun (§ [83], Nt): see § [137], (1). In the 1st and 2d pers. pl., habēmu’(§ [82], S, 2), habētis naturally gave avẹm, avẹtz (§ [64]); but inasmuch as the other four terminations were monosyllabic, the av- was dropped when avẹm, avẹtz came to be understood merely as future endings. The future is, therefore, inflected as follows:—
| cantar-ái | cantar-ẹm |
| cantar-ás | cantar-ẹtz, -ẹs, -ẹt |
| cantar-á | cantar-án, -ánt, -áun, -áu |
1. In Gascony and Languedoc we find -ęi for -ai: see §§ [23], 2; [162], (4). In Gascon and in the modern dialects of some other regions -am is used for ẹm. In some dialects of Béarn, Languedoc, Provence, and Dauphiné, -ẹm becomes -ẹn: cf. § [65], M, 1; also § [167], 2.
Conditional Endings.
153. Habēbam ＞ aβẹβa ＞ (probably through dissimilation: § [87], β) aβẹa ＞ avía (§ [26]); so avías, avía, aviám, aviátz, avían. But inasmuch as the conditional was formed in imitation of the future, and none of the future forms retained the av-, the conditional endings were reduced to -ía, -ías, -ía, -iám, -iátz, -ían. Some dialects, which substituted -on for -an, introduced -íon into the conditional: § [169]. The conditional is, therefore, inflected as follows:—
| cantar-ía | cantar-iám |
| cantar-ías | cantar-iátz, -iás, -iát |
| cantar-ía | cantar-ían, -íon, -ío |
1. In verse these endings are sometimes counted as monosyllabic: poiri͡a. Guiraut Riquier uses -íatz for -iátz. In some dialects of Béarn, Languedoc, Provence, and Dauphiné, -iám becomes -ián: cf. § [65], M, 1; also § [167], 2.
PRESENT.
154. The personal endings will be discussed separately in §§ [164-169].
155. The Provençal present indicative and subjunctive come, in the main, directly from the corresponding parts of the Latin verb:—
| amo | ＞ am | amāmu’ | ＞ amám | faciam | ＞ fassa | faciāmu’ | ＞ fassám |
| amas | ＞ amas | amaātis | ＞ amátz | facias | ＞ fassas | faciātis | ＞ fassátz |
| amat | ＞ ama | amant | ＞ áman | faciat | ＞ fassa | faciant | ＞ fássan |
In the 4th conjugation, however, most verbs have adopted the originally inchoative -sc- (§ [138]) and incorporated it into the inflection of the present, except in the 1st and 2d pers. pl. of the indicative:—
| florīsco | ＞ florísc | florēmu’ | ＞ florẹm[114] |
| florīscis | ＞ florís florísses | florētis | ＞ florętz[114] |
| florīscit | ＞ florís | florīscunt | ＞ floríscon |
| florīscam | ＞ florísca | floriscāmu’ | ＞ floriscám |
| florīscas | ＞ floríscas | floriscātis | ＞ floriscátz |
| florīscat | ＞ florísca | florīscant | ＞ floríscan |
We occasionally find such forms as florissẹm, florissętz, and florám, florátz.
1. The s coming from sc´ was of course originally palatal; it is sometimes written sh. The sc of the 1st pers. sg., the 3d pers. pl., and the whole pres. subjunctive was replaced, in some dialects, by s or sh: floris florish, florisson florishon, florissa florisha.
156. Of the Latin imperative forms, only the present active, 2d pers. sg. and pl., remained in use. The Provençal verb kept the sg., but substituted for the pl. the 2d pers. pl. of the present indicative:—
| ama | ＞ ama | tĕne | ＞ ten | crēde | ＞ crẹ |
| amāte amātis | ＞ amátz | tenēte tenētis | ＞ tenętz | crēdĭte ✱crēdĭ́tis[115] | ＞ crezętz |
| partī | ＞ part | fīnīsce | ＞ finís |
| partīte partītis | ＞ partętz[115] | finīte finītis | ＞ finętz[115] |
In negative commands the present subjunctive is generally used instead of the plural imperative, and sometimes the infinitive is employed instead of sg. or pl. The verbs auzir, avẹr, dire, ęsser, sabẹr, vezẹr, volẹr regularly took their imperative forms from the present subjunctive: áuias, digátz, veiátz, etc.
1. Fait ＜ facĭte (beside faitz) seems to come directly from the Latin form.
2. Before vos the pl. drops final -tz (or -t?): departe vos, vene vos. Ve vos becomes veus; a fusion of ve vos and ec ＜ eccum results in vecvos.
Double Stems.
157. Differences in accentuation and in the environment of vowels or consonants regularly developed different stems in different parts of some verbs. For instance, ádjūtā́re ＞ aidar (§ [45]), while adjū́tat ＞ aiüda.
158. Sometimes, as above, an intertonic vowel disappeared: mándūcā́re ＞ maniar, mandūco ＞ ✱mandüc manüc; ✱parabolāre ✱páraulā́re ＞ parlar, ✱parabŏlat ✱paraulat ＞ paraula. In such cases the shortened stem usually prevailed: mania, parla. But in adjutare the longer one was preferred: aiüdar.
159. (1) A vowel which breaks in one part of a verb may be unstressed, and therefore remain unbroken, in another part: probāre ＞ proar, prŏbat ＞ prueva,[116] ✱sequīre ＞ sęguir, ✱sĕquit ＞ sięc.[117] In such cases the phonetic development is generally undisturbed.
(2) A vowel which breaks in one part of a verb may, with different environment, remain unbroken even in another part in which it is stressed: ✱volēre ＞ volẹr, ✱vŏleo ＞ vuelh, ✱vŏlet ＞ vǫl. If the breaking occurs in the 1st pers. sg., the phonetic development is regularly undisturbed; if it occurs in the 2d and 3d pers. sg., it is generally carried into the other forms in which the vowel is stressed: cŏllĭgit ＞ cuęlh, hence cuęlh = collĭgo; ĕxit ＞ ięis, hence ięsc, ięscon, ięsca.
160. A consonant may be followed by e̯ or i̯, and so palatalized, in one part of the verb, and not in another: ✱cadeo ＞ chai, ✱cadēmu’ ＞ chazẹm; dēbeo ＞ dẹch dẹi (§ [73], βy), dēbet ＞ dẹu; faciat ＞ fassa, facĕre ＞ faire; fŭgio ＞ füi, fugĕre ＞ fugir; jaceam ＞ iassa, jacēre ＞ iazẹr[118]; placeāmu’ ＞ plassám, placēmu’ ＞ plazẹm; sapiam ＞ sapcha, sapit ＞ sap; tĕneo ＞ tenh, tĕnet ＞ ten; valeo ＞ valh, vales ＞ vals; vĕniat ＞ venha, venīre ＞ venir; vĭdeam ＞ vẹia, vidētis ＞ vezẹtz; ✱vŏleo ＞ vuęlh, ✱vŏlet ＞ vǫl. Verbs in -eo generally keep this distinction; but we find mǫva, somóna, tẹma = mŏveam, submŏneam, tĭmeam. Most verbs in -io, on the other hand, dropped the i̯ in Vulgar Latin: partio ✱parto ＞ part, partiunt ✱partunt ＞ parton, partiam ✱partam ＞ parta; sen, senton, senta; sięrf, sięrvon, sięrva; etc. A few verbs show forms both with and without the e̯ or i̯: audio ＞ auch (audiam ＞ auia), ✱audo ＞ au; crēdo ＞ crẹ, ✱crēdeo ＞ crẹi[119]; vĭdeo ＞ vẹi[119], ✱vĭdo ＞ vẹ.
161. Verbs in -ng- naturally developed a palatal consonant before e or i (§ [73], Ng´), but not before other vowels: cĭngĕre ＞ cẹnher, cĭngo ＞ cẹnc, cĭngit ＞ cẹnh, cĭngam ＞ cẹnga; so fẹnher, ọnher, plánher, pọnher, etc. The palatal was carried by analogy into the parts that were originally without it: hence the double forms cẹnc cẹnh, cẹngon cẹnhon, cẹnga cẹnha, etc. These double forms led tenẹr, venir to adopt tenc, venc, tenga, venga, beside the regular tenh, venh, tenha, venha. Such forms as these, supported by dẹrc ＜ de-ērĭgo, dic ＜ dīco, pręc ＜ prĕco, sęc ＜ ✱sequo, trac ＜ ✱trago, etc., afforded a starting-point for an ending -c, adopted by some other verbs in the 1st pers. sg. of the present indicative: pĕrdo ＞ pęrt pęrc, pr(eh)ĕndo ＞ pren prenc, remaneo ＞ remanh remanc, etc.
Peculiar Forms.
162. The following verbs have individual peculiarities that call for special mention:—
(1) Anar (＜ annāre), ‘to go’, takes most of its present from vadĕre: indicative, vau vauc (analogy of estau estauc), vas, va vai (analogy of fai), anám, anátz, van vaun (analogy of estan estaun); subjunctive, an or vaza (＜ vadam) vaia (analogy of vai and of traia), vaga (analogy of traga), etc.; imperative, vai (analogy of fai), anátz.
(2) Aucire (＜ occīidĕre: § [43]) has in the pres. indicative 3d sg. auci (＜ occīdit) and aucis (analogy of aucizém, aucizétz). Cf. auzir, caire, rire, traire, vezér. These forms were doubtless helped by the analogy of ditz (＜ dīcit), dütz, fatz, iatz, letz (＜ lĭcet), platz, tatz.
(3) Auzir (＜ audīre) has in the pres. indicative 3d sg. au (＜ audit) and aus (analogy of auzém, auzétz). Cf. aucire, caire, rire, traire, vezér. See also § [160].
(4) Aver (＜ habēre) has in the pres. indicative: ai (＜ habeo: § [73], βy), as, a, avém, avétz (see §§ [167], [168]), an aun; see § [137], (1). There is no trace of ✱ho. Instead of ai, the dialects of Aude, Tarn, Tarn et Garonne, and Haute-Garonne have ei (cf. Gram., II, p. 304), which probably developed first in the future (§ [152], 1) through the analogy of the preterit ending -ei which took the place of -ai: amāvi ✱amai ＞ ✱amai amei (§ [175]), then amarai ＞ amarei, then ai ＞ ei. The pres. subjunctive is aia (＜ habeam: § [73], βy). For the imperative, see § [156].
(5) Caire cazér (＜ cadĕre ✱cadēre) has in the pres. indicative 3d sg. ca (＜ cadit) cai (analogy of brai ＜ ✱bragit, fai, trai ＜ ✱tragit, vai) cas (analogy of cazém, cazétz: cf. aucire, auzir, rire, traire, vezér).
(6) Conóisser (＜ cognōscĕre) has in the pres. indicative 1st sg. conosc (＜ cognōsco) and conóis (analogy of 2d and 3d sg., conóisses, conóis).
(7) Creire (＜ crēdĕre): pres. subjunctive creza (＜ crēdam) and crega (analogy of diga, sega, traga). See also § [160].
(8) Créisser (＜ crēscĕre): pres. subjunctive cresca (＜ crēscam) and crega (analogy of diga, sega, traga, and of the imperfect subjunctive cregués).
(9) Dar (＜ dare): dau (＜ ✱dao), daun (＜ ✱daunt); see § [137], (1).
(10) Destruire (＜ ✱destrūgĕre = destruĕre): analogy of agĕre, tĕgĕre, etc. Cf. traire. ✱Destrūgit ＞ destrüi.
(11) Dever (＜ debēre) has in the pres. indicative 1st sg., beside dech dei (§ [160]), dec (analogy of dic, prec, sec, trac, and perhaps of the preterit dec).
(12) Dire (＜ dīcĕre): dic (＜ dīco) diu (cf. § [51], 3; § [65], G, 1); ditz (＜ dīcit) di (analogy of fai, trai, and of imperative di ＜ dīc); dízon (analogy of ditz, dizém, dizétz); diga dia (both ＜ dīcam: § [65], G). For the imperative, see § [156].
(13) Düire (＜ dūcĕre): dütz (＜ dūcit) düi (analogy of destrüi, trai).
(14) Eissir (＜ exīre): iesc, iescon, iesca, analogy of conosc, florisc, etc.; for vowel, see § [159], (2).
(15) Ésser estre (＜ ✱ĕssĕre = ĕsse). Pres. indicative: sŭm ＞ sọn sọ (§ [82], M), then, by the analogy of ai and füi, sọi süi; ĕs became ęst ięst, perhaps through ĕs tu ＞ ęs-t-u ＞ ęst-tü, supported by the analogy of the preterit ending of the 2d sg. (vọs vendętz, tü vendęst or vendięst, so, to match vọs ętz, a form tü ęst or ięst); ĕst became ẹs, probably through such combinations as quẹ’s (understood as qu’ẹs); sīmu’, which existed in Latin beside sŭmus (Rom., XXI, 347), gave sẹm, while from ĕstis there was constructed an ✱ĕsmus ＞ ęsmes (rare), and from ętz a form ẹm (very common); ĕstis ＞ ęstz ętz (§ [78], 2); sŭnt ＞ sọn sǫ (§ [83], Nt). Pres. subjunctive: sĭm, sīs, etc., were replaced in V. L. by ✱sĭam, ✱sĭas, etc. (on the analogy of fiam, faciam, etc.), which gave sía sías sía siám siátz, sían síon; we find also sẹia, etc., formed apparently on deia, veia. Imperative borrowed from subjunctive.
(16) Estar (＜ stare). Pres. indicative: estáu (＜ ✱stao) estáuc (§ [161]); estás (＜ stas); está (＜ stat) estái (analogy of fai, trai); estám (＜ stamu’); estátz (＜ statis) estáitz (after faitz); están (＜ stant) estáun (＜ ✱staunt); see § [137] (1). Pres. subjunctive: estía, etc., estéia, etc., patterned on sia, seia; also estéi, perhaps a cross between esteia and ✱esté ＜ stem. Imperative: está, estáitz.
(17) Faire far (＜ facĕre ✱fare): § [137], (1). Pres. indicative: fatz (＜ facio) fau (analogy of dau, estau) fac fauc (§ [161]); fas (＜ ✱fas); fatz (＜ facit) fa (＜ ✱fat) fai (influence of faire, faim, faitz, and of trai); faim (＜ facĭmu’: § [167], 1) fam (＜ ✱famu’) fazém (see fazétz); faitz (＜ facĭtis) fatz (＜ ✱fatis) fazétz (analogy of regular verbs, crezétz, etc.); fan (＜ ✱fant) faun (analogy of daun, estaun). Pres. subjunctive: faça fassa, etc. (＜ faciam, etc.). Imperative: fai (＜ fac); fatz faitz (borrowed from indicative) fait (＜ facĭte).
(18) Iazér (＜ jacēre), also iassér (influence of ias ＜ iatz ＜ jacet, and of iassa?): iatz (＜ jacet) iai (analogy of fai, trai); iassa (＜ jaceam) iaia (analogy of traia, vaia).
(19) Movér móure (＜ movēre ✱mŏvĕre): mova (＜ ✱mŏvam = mŏveam) moga (analogy of traga).
(20) Partir (＜ partīre): part (＜ ✱parto = partio) parc (§ [161]); so parta parga.
(21) Perdre (＜ pĕdĕre): pert perc, perda perga; see § [161].
(22) Plazér plaire (＜ placēre ✱placĕre): platz (＜ placet) plai (analogy of fai, trai); plassa (＜ placeam) plaia (analogy of traia, vaia).
(23) Podér (＜ ✱potēre = pŏsse): see § [137], (1). Pres. indicative: posc (＜ pŏssum influenced by cognōsco) puosc puesc (analogy of puoc puec ＜ pŏtui), puecs (? ＜ ✱pots ＜ ✱pŏtsum + puesc), pois (＜ ✱pŏsseo); potz (＜ pŏtes); pot (＜ pŏtet = pŏtest); podém (＜ ✱potēmu’); podétz (＜ ✱potētis); póden (＜ ✱potent) pódon, pon (analogy of potz, pot, and son ＜ sŭnt). Pres. subjunctive: posca puosca puesca (like posc puosc puesc), etc.; poissa (＜ ✱pŏsseam), etc.
(24) Prendre (prĕndĕre = prehĕndĕre) penre (see § [71], end): pren (＜ prĕndo) prenh (analogy of tenh, venh) prenc (§ [161]); so prenda prenha prenga.
(25) Rire (＜ ✱rīdĕre): ri (＜ rīdet) ritz (analogy of rizém, rizétz: cf. aucire, auzir, caire, traire, vezér); ria (＜ rīdeam?).
(26) Sabér (＜ ✱sapēre): see § [137], 1. Pres. indicative: sai sei (analogy of ai ei from avér); saps; sap; sabém (＜ ✱sapēmu’); sabétz (＜ ✱sapētis); sáben (＜ ✱sapent) sábon. Pres. subjunctive: sapcha (＜ sapiam). Imperative from subjunctive.
(27) Tazér taire (＜ tacēre ✱tacĕre): tatz (＜ tacet) tai (analogy of taire and of fai, trai).
(28) Tenér (＜ tenēre): tenh (＜ tĕneo) tenc (§ [161]); so tenha tenga.
(29) Traire (＜ ✱tragĕre, perhaps also ✱tracĕre, = trahĕre): trac (＜ ✱trago or ✱traco) trai (§ [63], 6)[120]; trai (＜ ✱tragit) tra (analogy of da, esta, fa, va) tratz (＜ ✱tracit?: cf. aucire, auzir, caire, rire, vezér); trázon (analogy of tratz); traga traia (both ＜ ✱tragam).
(30) Vezér (＜ vidēre): vei (＜ vĭdeo) vec (§ [161]); ve (＜ vĭdet) ves (analogy of vezém, vezétz: cf. aucire, auzir, caire, rire, traire). Imperative from subjunctive.
(31) Volér (＜ ✱volēre = vĕlle): see § [137], (1). Pres. indicative: vuelh (＜ ✱vŏleo); vols (＜ ✱vŏles); vol (＜ ✱vŏlet); volém (＜ ✱volēmu’)[121]; volétz (＜ ✱volētis); vólon (＜ ✱vŏlent). Pres. subjunctive: vuelha (＜ ✱vŏleam), vuelhas, vuelha, vulhám, vulhátz, vuelhan. Imperative from subjunctive.
163. In verse the present subjunctive ending -ia sometimes counts as one syllable: si͡atz. Cf. § [153], 1.
Personal Endings[122].
164. (1) In the first person singular final -o and -em regularly disappeared: amo ＞ am, amem ＞ am. When, however, the -o or -em was preceded by a consonant group requiring a supporting vowel (§ [52]), the ending was regularly retained as -e: dŭbĭto ＞ dọpte, sŭffĕro ＞ suffre, trĕmŭlem ＞ tremble.
Through the analogy of ai, crẹi, dẹi, sọi, vẹi, and the 1st pers. sg. of the preterit, this -e was in the indicative generally changed at an early date to -i: ✱cŏpĕro ＞ cǫbre cǫbri, ✱opĕro ＞ ǫbre ǫbri; so ĭmpleo ✱ĭmplo ＞ ompli. This -i (occasionally -e) was then taken as a distinctive ending of the 1st pers. sg., and was added to many verbs that needed no supporting vowel: auzir, au auze; azorar, azọr azọri; cantar, can canti; cọrre, cọr cọrri; mẹtre, mẹt mẹti; prezar, prętz pręzi; remirar, remir remire remiri; respondre, respon respondi; sentir, sen senti; vẹndre, vẹn vẹndi.
In the subjunctive, when a final vowel was required, -e was usually kept; it was also extended to some verbs that did not need it: acabe, dọne, mire, plọre. Very rarely an unnecessary -i was added instead of -e: laissar, lais laissi.
(2) The ending -am regularly gave -a: audiam ＞ auia.
165. In the second person singular final -as regularly remained, and -ēs and -ī̆s became -s (or, when a supporting vowel was required, -es): amas ＞ amas; valēs ＞ vals, sapĭs ＞ saps, partīs ＞ partz; dŭbĭtēs ＞ dọptes. Cf. § [82], S. Sometimes, especially in late texts, -s is expanded into -es: canz cantes, partz partes, saps sabes, vals vales; so floris florisses, etc.
Final -a remained, and -ē̆ and -ī fell: ama ＞ ama, tĕne ＞ ten, crēde ＞ crẹ, partī ＞ part.
166. In the third person singular final -at became -a, -ĕt and -ĭt fell (but remained as -e when a supporting vowel was needed): amat ＞ ama, amet ＞ am, tĕnet ＞ ten te, vĕnit ＞ ven ve; trĕmŭlet ＞ tremble. Cf. § [82], T.
167. In the first person plural the final -s disappeared early, s being perhaps regarded as a distinctively second person ending[123]. The rare form ęsmes = sŭmus is the only one that retains the s: cf. § [162], (15).
Then -āmu’, -ēmu’ gave regularly -am, -ẹm: cantāmus ＞ cantám, habēmus ＞ avẹm. Likewise -ĭmu’, through the analogy of -āmu’, -ēmu’, came to take the accent on its penult, and then regularly developed into -ẹm: crēdĭmus ✱credĭ́mu’ ＞ crezẹm. This -ẹm of the second and third conjugations passed into the fourth, and entirely displaced the -im that would have been the regular representative of -īmu’: partīmus ＞ ✱partím partẹm.
1. In faim ＜ facĭmu’ the old accentuation apparently survives: cf. § [52], (4), 1.
2. In some dialects of Béarn, Languedoc, Provence, and Dauphiné, -m apparently becomes -n: devén, havén, volén; so aurián, trobarén, segrián (cf. § [152], 1; § [153], 1). Cf. § [65], M, 1.
168. In the second person plural -ātis regularly gave -atz: amātis ＞ amatz, audiātis ＞ auiatz. The regular form from -ētis is -ẹtz, which we find kept in the future (veirẹtz) and in the present subjunctive (cantẹtz); in the present indicative it was replaced by -ętz, probably through the analogy of ętz ＜ ĕstis: habētis ＞ avẹtz avętz, ✱potētis ＞ podẹtz podętz, so sezętz, valętz, etc.; the rare avẹtz and podẹtz are the only forms that preserve ẹ. The ending -ĭtis, taking the accent on its penult (cf. § [167]), became ✱-ẹtz, then -ętz: crēdĭtis ＞ crezętz. This -ętz also displaced the -itz that would have been regular in the fourth conjugation: partītis ＞ partętz.
The final -tz was reduced, in some of the principal dialects, to -s (§ [64]): cantás, sezęs, partęs. In other dialects it was replaced very early by -t (§ [64]): auiát, avęt, passát, podęt; so partirẹt, etc.
1. In faitz ＜ facĭtis the old accentuation apparently survives.
169. In the third person plural -ant, -ent, -unt gave respectively -an -ant, -en, -on -o (§ [83], Nt): amant ＞ áman ámant, audiant ＞ áuian áuiant; valent ＞ válen, ament ＞ ámen; vēndunt ＞ vẹndon vẹndo. In Languedoc -an was replaced by -on or -o in the 13th century; in other regions, later: ámon, chanto ls, coménso l. The Boeci has -en for -an: amen, monten. In Gascony and some of the Limousin territory -en partially displaced -on (floríssen, párten, vẹnden), elsewhere -on or -o displaced -en (válon).
IMPERFECT INDICATIVE.
170. In the first conjugation -abam regularly gave -ava. In the second, through the analogy of aβéa ＜ habēbam (§ [153]), -ēbam came to be replaced, in southern Gaul, by -éa, which regularly changed to -ía (§ [26]). In the third, -iēbam regularly became -ēbam (§ [40], 1); and this and original -ēbam were replaced by the -éa ＞ -ía of the second conjugation. In the fourth, -ībam, which had in the accented syllable the characteristic vowel of the conjugation, crowded out -iēbam; -ībam then lost its β through the analogy of the second and third conjugations. We have, then, in Provençal, only two sets of endings: -áva, etc., in the first conjugation; -ía, etc., in the second, third, and fourth.
| amáva | vezía | fazía | partía |
| amávas | vezías | fazías | partías |
| amáva | vezía | fazía | partía |
| amavám | veziám | faziám | partiám |
| amavátz | veziátz | faziátz | partiátz |
| amávan | vezían | fazían | partían |
1. In poetry ía is sometimes counted as one syllable: avi͡an, devi͡an.
2. For some subsequent developments of western dialects, see Meyer-Lübke, Gram., II, p. 326.
3. For the personal endings, see §§ [164-169].
4. Esser has: ęra, ęras, ęra, erám, erátz erás, ęran ęron ęro.
PRETERIT, OLD CONDITIONAL, AND IMPERFECT SUBJUNCTIVE.
171. These parts are all formed from the same stem, that of the Latin perfect: cf. § [141], (2). Ex.: cantęi, cantęra, cantęs; vendęi, vendęra, vendęs; partí, partíra, partís; vi, vira, vis; dẹc, dẹgra, deguẹs.
Preterit.
172. Preterits which stress the ending throughout are called weak; those which do not stress the ending throughout are called strong: partí, partíst, partí, partím, partítz, partíron is weak; saup, saubíst, saup, saubém, saubétz, sáubron is strong. Verbs of the first and fourth conjugations regularly have weak preterits (amęi, finí). Verbs of the second and third, with very few exceptions, originally had strong preterits (placuī ＞ plac, fēcī ＞ fis): many of them, however, developed weak preterits either in Vulgar Latin or in Provençal (irasquęi, nasquęi, tessęi tesquęi, visquęi); some assumed a weak form in -í in the 1st pers. sg. (dis dissí, pris prenguí, remas remanguí, trais traguí: cf. §§ [173], [177]); quęrre, on the other hand, substituted a strong preterit (quis, etc.) for a weak one.
173. (1) Final -ī, in the first pers. sg., doubtless remained through the earlier stages of Provençal (habuī ＞ águi, dīxī ＞ díssi): cf. § [51], (2). Before it fell, it changed an accented ẹ in the preceding syllable to i (vēnī ✱vēnuī ＞ ✱vẹngui vinc): cf. § [27]; occasionally, however, the ẹ was kept, through the analogy of the other persons (pris prẹs). Sometimes, instead of falling, the -i took the accent (following the analogy of the fourth conjugation) and remained: águi ＞ ac or aguí, díssi ＞ dis or dissí (cf. § [177]).
When the -i was immediately preceded by an accented vowel, it regularly formed a diphthong with that vowel, and did not fall (fuī ＞ füi): cf. § [51], (3); but -íi was simplified to -i (partīvī partīī ＞ partí).
Before enclitic l, -ei -iei were often reduced to -e -ie: cantiel.
(2) In the 2d pers. sg., -stī became -st, a preceding ẹ being changed to i (§ [27]): partīstī ＞ partíst, debuĭstī ＞ deguíst; sometimes, through the analogy of the 2d pers. pl., ẹ remains (venguẹst: cf. § [27], 2). Occasionally the final -t disappears: anięst anięs, fezíst fezís.
(3) The -t of the 3d pers. sg. was lost in strong preterits: placuit ＞ plac, vīdit ＞ vi. In weak preterits, it was retained by most dialects after é, and by many after í: donęt donę, vendęt vendę; partí partít. Cf. § [82], T.
(4) In the 1st pers. pl., -mus -mu’ (see § [167]) was reduced to -m: vīdĭmu’ ＞ vim.
(5) The -stis of the 2d pers. pl. regularly became -tz (§ [78], 2), later in many dialects -s (§ [64]): debuĭstis ＞ deguẹtz deguẹs.
(6) The -runt of the 3d pers. pl. regularly gave -ron or -ro (§ [83], Nt): partīrunt ＞ partíron partíro, vīdĕrunt ＞ viron viro. In some dialects -en is substituted for -on: fŭĕrunt ＞ fọron fọren (cf. § [169]).
The e before -runt, which in classic Latin was usually long, was always short in Vulgar Latin when it was preserved at all: amavĕrunt ＞ amārunt, fēcĕrunt.
Weak Preterits.
174. (1) In the first and fourth conjugations we find in Latin the following endings:—
| -āvī -āī | -āvĭmus | -īvī -īī | -īvĭmus |
| -āvĭstī -āstī | -āvĭstis -āstis | -īvĭstī -īstī | -īvĭstis -īstis |
| -āvit -aut | -āvēre -āvē̆runt -ārunt | -īvit -īit -īt | -īvēre -īvē̆runt -īrunt |
The popular speech preferred in every case the shortened form, and generally reduced -āvĭmus, -īvĭmus to -āmus, -īmus (in southern Gaul -āmu’, -īmu’: § [167]), on the analogy of the 2d pers. sg. and pl.
(2) In the second conjugation a few verbs (delēre, flēre, nēre, -olēre, -plēre, viēre) had similar endings (delēvī, etc.), which were doubtless contracted in like fashion in so far as these words were in common use. Most verbs of this conjugation, however, had strong preterits (tacēre, tacuī; vidēre, vīdī; etc.).
(3) The third conjugation had in classic Latin no weak endings corresponding to those of the first, second, and fourth; but the vulgar speech developed a set in the following manner. Compounds of dare formed their perfect in -dĭdī (perdĭdī); this -dĭdī, in accordance with the principle set forth in § [16], 3, came to be pronounced -dę́dị (condédi); and -dędị, probably through dissimilation[124], was shortened to -dęi (✱credéi). With this form as a starting-point, a weak preterit was created on the analogy of those of the other conjugations, the endings being something like -ęi, -ęstị, -ęt, -ęmus -ęmu’, -ęstis, -ęrunt. This inflection was probably extended to some verbs outside the -dĕre class (✱battéi, etc.?).
175. (1) In Provençal the weak inflection disappeared from the second conjugation, delēre and -plēre passing into the fourth, and the other weak verbs going out of use.
(2) Verbs of the fourth conjugation (except venir) all took the weak endings -í, -íst, -í, -ím, -ítz, -íron: partí, partíst, partí, partím, partítz, partíron. Irregular verbs either disappeared or became regular (sensī = sentí), with the exception of venīre ＞ venir (vinc).[125]
(3) The new weak endings of the third conjugation developed into -ęi, -ęst, -ęt, -ém, -ętz, -ęron: vendęi, vendęst, vendęt, vendém, vendętz, vendęron. In the 1st pers. sg. the ę often broke (vendięi), and the diphthong was sometimes carried into the 2d pers. sg. (vendięst). These endings were considerably extended in Provençal (cazęt, etc.), and were occasionally attached to a strong preterit stem (nasquęt, tesquęt, venquęt, visquęt). Most verbs, however, kept their strong preterit (mis, conọc). The -īvī perfect disappeared from the third conjugation: quæsīvit ＞ ✱quæsit ＞ quẹs.
(4) The first conjugation discarded its own weak endings, and substituted those of the third: cantęi cantięi, cantęst cantięst, cantęt, cantém, cantętz, cantęron. This strange phenomenon seems to have originated as follows: dare, dĕdī ＞ dar, dęi; from dar the ending -ęi was readily extended to estar (estęi); and from these two very common verbs it spread to the whole first conjugation.
Irregular verbs (except dare, stare) either disappeared or became regular.
1. According to Meyer-Lübke, Gram., II, p. 304, Latin -ai became by phonetic process -ęi in Vulgar Latin, and -ęi or -ięi in Provençal. There seems to be no evidence to support this theory. Cf. § [23], 2.
2. In the dialects of Béarn and Catalonia the original a remains in some parts of the preterit.
176. A final -c, which developed in the strong -ui preterits (§ [184]), often became attached to the 3d pers. sg. of weak preterits of the fourth conjugation: floríc, fugíc, iauzíc, partíc.[126] It was sometimes extended to other weak preterits: chantęc, entendęc, nasquęc,[127] paręc.[128] We find also a 3d pers. pl. cazęgron, etc., and even a 1st pers. sg. ameguí, etc. In some western dialects the final -c was adopted by the whole first conjugation: donęc, portęc, etc.
177. Some strong preterits occasionally assumed weak endings:—
(1) In the 1st pers. sg. several verbs in -s sometimes either added an -í or shifted the stress to an originally unaccented final -i (cf. §§ [172], [173]): dis dissí, pris presí, quis quesí, respos respozí. A few verbs in -c did the same: aic aiguí, bẹc beguí, conọc conoguí, saup saubí, vinc venguí, vǫlc volguí. An ending -guí being thus established, this syllable was sometimes added to preterits not of the -c class: costrenguí, destrenguí, prenguí, remanguí, restrenguí, traguí.
(2) In the 3d pers. sg. weak endings are rare: ac aguęt, vẹnc venguęt.
(3) In the 3d pers. pl. the weak ending is not uncommon in -s preterits: diron dissęron, düistrent düissęron, mẹsdren mezęron, prẹson presęron, remastrent remazęron, traissęron. We probably have to deal here, as in (1), with a shift of accent—dīxĕrunt ＞ ✱dísseron ＞ dissęron, etc.: see § [49], (2). The same thing may be true of such a form as aguęron, beside ágron, from ✱áβwerunt = habuĕrunt; such a form as visquęron, on the other hand, is doubtless imitative.
Strong Preterits.
178. (1) The reduplicative perfects were discarded in Vulgar Latin, with the exception of dĕdi (and its compounds) and stĕti, whose reduplicative character was no longer apparent. Cecĭdī became ✱cadui or ✱cadéi; the rest either disappeared or passed into the -sī class: cucŭrrī ＞ ✱cŭrsī, momŏrdī ＞ ✱mŏrsī, pepĕndī ＞ ✱pē(n)sī, pupŭgī ＞ ✱punxī, tetĕndī ＞ ✱tē(n)sī, tetĕgī ＞ ✱taxī ✱tanxī.
(2) The -i perfects were greatly reduced in number in Vulgar Latin. Some disappeared (ēgī), some became weak (fūgī ＞ ✱fugīī ＞ fügí); others passed into the -sī or the -uī class: prehĕndī ＞ ✱prē(n)sī ＞ pris; bĭbit ＞ ✱bĭbuit ＞ bẹc, vēnit ＞ ✱vēnuit ＞ vẹnc. In Provençal only three -ī verbs remained: fēcī ＞ fis, fuī ＞ füi, vīdī ＞ vi.
(3) Of the -sī class (including -ssī and -xī) over twenty verbs were preserved in Vulgar Latin (dīxī, excŭssī, mīsī, traxī, etc.), and about the same number passed into this class from others (absco(n)sī, ✱fraxī ✱sŭrsī, etc.): cf. (1) and (2) above. In Provençal nearly half the verbs of the second and third conjugations have -sī preterits: rema(n)sī ＞ remas, ✱respō(n)sī ＞ respọs[129].
(4) The -uī class held its own very well in Vulgar Latin (placuī, etc.) and received some additions (natus sum ＞ ✱nacuī, sustŭlī ＞ ✱tŏluī, vēnī ＞ ✱vēnuī, vīcī ＞ ✱vĭncuī, vīxī ＞ ✱vīscuī, etc.)[130]. To this class belonged, in Vulgar Latin (and, according to Meyer-Lübke[131], in classic Latin also), all perfects in -vī, this ending being pronounced -wŭī, later -wwị or -βwị: cognōvī ＞ ✱conōvuī ＞ conọc, crēvit ＞ ✱crēvuit ＞ crẹc, mōvī ＞ ✱mŏvuī ＞ mǫc. Cf. § [148]. In Provençal not far from half the verbs of the second and third conjugations have -uī preterits. For a combination of a -c ＜ -uī stem with a weak ending, see § [175], (3). For the extension of -c ＜ -uī to other conjugations, see § [176].
179. In the 1st pers. pl. the accent was shifted to the ending, to make this form correspond to the 2d pers. sg. and pl.: fēcĭmus ＞ ✱fēcĭ́mu’ ＞ fezẹm (cf. fecĭstī ＞ fezist, fecĭstis ＞ fezẹtz), ✱prē(n)sĭmus ＞ ✱presĭ́mu’ ＞ prezẹm, debŭĭmus ＞ deβwĭ́mu’ ＞ deguẹm. Exceptions are fŭĭmus ＞ fọm, vīdĭmus ＞ vim; in these verbs the 2d pers. forms also are monosyllabic (füst, fọtz; vist, vitz).
180. We find in some verbs an irregular 3d pers. pl. without -r-, made by adding -on or -en to the 3d pers. sg., the final consonant of which is voiced in all verbs in which it is voiced in the other persons of the plural: (aucire) aucis, aucíson; (plánher) plais, pláisson; (prenre) prẹs, prẹson; (remanre) remas, remáson; (venir) vẹnc, vẹnguen; (volẹr) vǫlc, vǫlgon.
1. Prenre has preiron (beside preson preseron), probably through the analogy of feiron ＜ fēcĕrunt. Mairon, from maner, is perhaps to be explained in the same way.
181. (1) Through the change of -e- to -i- by the influence of a final -ī, as described in § [173], (1), a distinction was established between the first and the third person singular of some preterits: crēvī ＞ cric, crēvit ＞ crẹc; fēcī ＞ fis, fēcit ＞ fẹs; ✱prē(n)sī ＞ pris, ✱prē(n)sit ＞ prẹs; tĕnuī ✱tēnuī[132] ＞ tinc, tĕnuit ✱tēnuit ＞ tẹnc; vēnī ✱vēnuī[132] ＞ vinc, vēnit ✱vēnuit ＞ vẹnc. Mẹtre, also, has mis, mẹs, which may come from ✱mĭssī ✱mĭssit (cf. mĭssum) = mīsī, mīsit; or perhaps mis comes from mīsī and mẹs is analogical. Through the analogy of such forms, quęrre has quis, quẹs. In the preterit of podẹr, both pŏtuī and pŏtuit would regularly have given pǫc puǫc puęc (§ [37]), but pǫc was kept for the 3d person, and puǫc puęc was used for the 1st. The preterit of volẹr differentiates the two persons similarly—vuęlc, vǫlc; here the diphthong (perhaps under the influence of puęc) is borrowed from the present, where we have ✱vŏleo ＞ vuęlh, ✱vŏlet ＞ vǫl (§ [37]). Avẹr, likewise, borrows a distinction from the present: aic, ac reproduce the vowels of ai, a; aic + aguí ＞ aiguí.
(2) For -í as a characteristic of the first person, see § [177], (1).
(3) For -c as a distinctive mark of the third person, see § [176].
182. The three -ī perfects developed in Provençal as follows:—
(1) Facĕre ＞ faire (✱fare ＞ far) has:
| fēcī | ＞fis, fezí | fēĭmus ✱fēcĭ́mu’ | ＞fezẹm |
| fēcĭ́stī | ＞fezíst fezís | fēcĭstis | ＞fezẹtz fezẹs |
| fēcit | ＞fẹtz fẹs | fēcĕrunt | ＞fẹiron fẹiro |
1. We do not find, in the 1st pers. sg., as we should expect (§ [65], C´), fitz beside fis; doubtless the form came early under the influence of mis, pris, quis, etc. For fezí, see § [177], (1). There is also a form fi, due, perhaps, to the analogy of vi ＜ vīdī; corresponding to fi are 3d pers. sg. fe, and pl. fem, fes, feron. A rare figuí is evidently made on the model of aiguí, etc. In the 3d pers. sg. we find also fei, which seems to be patterned after feiron or after the present fai.
(2) Esse (＞ ✱ĕssĕre ＞ ęsser ęstre) had originally a long u in the perfect. In literary Latin the u was shortened, but the popular speech seems to have kept ū beside ŭ. The Provençal 1st and 2d pers. sg. apparently come from fūī, ✱fūstī = fuĭstī (although Pr. füi might be taken from fŭī), while the other forms presuppose ŭ:
| fūī | ＞füi | fŭĭmus ✱fŭmu’ | ＞fọm |
| fūĭstī ✱fūstī | ＞füst füs | fŭĭstis ✱fŭstis | ＞fọtz fọs |
| fŭit ✱fŭt | ＞fọ, fọn, fọnc | fŭĕrunt ✱fŭrunt | ＞fọron fọro, fọren |
1. A rare fo in the 1st pers. sg. seems to be simply borrowed from the 3d. In the 3d pers. sg., fon beside fo is due to the analogy of -on -o in the 3d pers. pl., and, in general, of such double forms as bon bo, mon mo, son so, ton to: cf. § [63], (5). Fonc shows the influence of tenc, venc.
| vīdī | ＞✱viði ✱við vi, vic | vīdĭmus ✱vīdĭmu’ | ＞✱viðmu ✱viim vim |
| vīdĭstī | ＞vist vis | vīdĭstis | ＞vitz vis |
| vīdit | ＞✱við vi, vit, vic | vīdĕrunt | ＞✱viðrun viron viro |
1. The 1st pers. sg. vic is patterned upon aic ＜ habuī, cric ＜ crēvi, etc. The 2d pers. forms are irregular, as we should expect ✱vezist, ✱vezetz: evidently the 2d pers. followed the analogy of the 1st and 3d. In the 3d pers. sg., vit and vic follow the model of partit, partic, etc.: see § [173], (3), and § [176].
183. In the -sī perfect the 3d pers. pl. presented difficulties. If the -e- of the penult fell, an s or z and an r were brought together. Most dialects apparently preserved the -e-, and shifted the accent to it (aucizęron, condüissęron, dissęron, prezęron, remazęron, traissęron), or else borrowed outright the weak ending (respondęron): cf. § [49], (2), and § [177], (3). Dialects which lost the -e- too early to follow this method, generally suppressed the sibilant (aucíron, diron, mẹron from mẹtre, remáron), or omitted the -r- and formed the 3d pers. pl. directly from the 3d pers. sg. (aucízon, pláisson, prẹzon, remázon: § [180]), or else imitated a preterit of another class (mairon from manẹr, prẹiron from prenre, doubtless patterned after fẹiron ＜ fēcĕrunt); some borderland dialects kept the sibilant and the r, and developed a dental between them (düystrent ＜ dūxĕrunt, mẹsdren ＜ mīsĕrunt + ✱mĭssĕrunt: § [70], Sr, Zr).
As examples of the -sī perfect we may take the preterit of dire ＜ dīcĕre and penre prenre ＜ pr(eh)ĕndĕre:—
(1)
| dīxī | ＞dis, dissí | dīxĭmus ✱dīxĭ́mu’ | ＞dissẹm |
| dīxĭstī | ＞dissíst | dīxĭstis | ＞dissẹtz dissẹs |
| dīxit | ＞dis | dīxĕrunt | ＞dissęron, diron diro |
(2)
| ✱prē(n)sī | ＞pris, prẹs, presí | ✱prē(n)sĭmus ✱prēsĭ́mu’ | ＞presẹm |
| ✱prē(n)sĭstī | ＞presíst | ✱prē(n)sĭstis | ＞presẹtz presẹs |
| ✱prē(n)sit | ＞prẹs | ✱prē(n)sĕrunt | ＞presęron, prẹson, prẹiron |
(3) Escriure ＜ scrībĕre has, beside escris ＜ scrīpsī, a preterit escrius (cf. p. p. escriut escrit escrich), in which the u is probably due to the influence of the infinitive.
(4) For dissí, presí, quesí, respozí, see § [177], (1). For pris prẹs, etc., see § [173], (1).
184. In the -uī perfect the development depends somewhat upon the consonant preceding the u. The treatment of the various cons. + w groups, which was discussed in § [72], may be illustrated by habuit ＞ ac[133], crēvit ✱crēvuit ＞ crẹc[134]; nŏcuit ＞ nǫc[135]; sēdit ✱sĕduit ＞ sęc, pŏtuit ＞ pǫc; valuit ＞ valc[136], tĕnuit ✱tēnuit ＞ tẹnc[137], mĕruit ＞ męrc; sapuit ＞ saup[138]: the noteworthy features are the change of u to -c (through w, gw, g), the absorption of the preceding consonant unless it be a liquid, a nasal, or a p, the preservation of the liquid or nasal, and the metathesis of the p.
Avẹr ＜ habēre, podẹr ＜ ✱pŏtēre pŏsse, volẹr ＜ ✱vŏlēre vĕlle, sabẹr ＜ ✱sapēre sapĕre will serve as examples (for the accentuation of the 3d pers. pl., see § [16], 2):—
(1)
| habuī | ＞ac, aguí, aic, aiguí | habuĭmus ✱aβwĭ́mu’ | ＞aguẹm |
| habuĭstī | ＞aguíst | habuĭstis | ＞aguẹtz aguẹs |
| habuit | ＞ac | habuĕrunt | ＞ágron ágro, aguęron |
1. For aguí (beguí, conoguí), see § [177], (1). For aic, aiguí, (cric), see § [181], (1). For aguęron (visquęron), see § [177], (3).
(2)
| pŏtuī | ＞pǫc puǫc puęc | potuĭmus ✱potwĭ́mu’ | ＞poguẹm |
| potuĭstī | ＞poguíst | potuĭstis | ＞poguẹtz poguẹs |
| pŏtuit | ＞pǫc, pǫt | potuĕrunt | ＞pǫgron pǫgro |
1. For puoc, see § [181], (1). Pot is apparently due to the combined influence of weak preterits and the parts of poder in which the dental is preserved.
(3)
| vŏluī | ＞vǫlc, vuęlc, volguí | voluĭmus ✱volwĭ́mu’ | ＞volguẹm |
| voluĭstī | ＞volguíst | voluĭstis | ＞volguẹtz volguẹs |
| vŏluit | ＞vǫlc | voluĕrunt | ＞vǫlgron vǫlgro |
1. For vuelc (tinc, vinc), see § [181], (1); for volguí (venguí), § [177], (1).
(4)
| sapuī | ＞saup, saubí | sapuĭmus ✱sapwĭ́mu’ | ＞saubẹm |
| sapuĭstī | ＞saubíst | sapuĭstis | ＞saubẹtz saubẹs |
| sapuit | ＞saup | sapuĕrunt | ＞sáubron sáubro, sáupron |
1. For saubí, see § [177], (1). For sáupron (sáupra, saupés, saupút), see § [65], P, 3; cf. § [148], (2).
Old Conditional.
185. The old conditional came from the Latin pluperfect indicative, which had been supplanted in its pluperfect sense by a compound form, and was gradually restricted in its use to the functions of a preterit, a perfect conditional, and a simple conditional: see § [141], (2). In Provençal it had only the conditional meaning; and as the new conditional rendered it superfluous, it fell into disuse (with the exception of ágra and fọra) in the 13th and 14th centuries: see § [142], (2).
186. In the fourth conjugation the old conditional comes from the contracted form of the pluperfect (audīram ＜ audīvĕram). Weak verbs of the third conjugation constructed a similar form (✱vendęram). First conjugation verbs started with the contracted pluperfect (amāram ＜ amāvĕram), but in Provençal substituted ę for á, as in the preterit: § [175], (4). The Provençal types of the old conditional of weak verbs are, therefore, represented by: amęra, vendęra, auzíra. The inflection is as follows:—
| amęra | amerám |
| amęras | amerátz |
| amęra | amęran |
| auzíra | auzirám |
| auzíras | auzirátz |
| auzíra | auzíran |
187. Strong verbs of the -ī and the -uī classes regularly took their old conditional directly from the Latin pluperfect: fēcĕram ＞ fẹira, fŭĕram ＞ fọra, vīdĕram ＞ vira; habŭĕram ✱áβwĕram (§ [16], 2) ＞ ágra, pŏtŭĕram ＞ pǫgra, vŏlŭĕram ＞ vǫlgra, sapŭĕram ＞ sáubra sáupra (§ [65], P, 3). Of course the Latin pluperfect, and therefore the Provençal conditional, followed the shift of the perfect if it changed from one class to another: vēnī ＞ ✱vēnuī, hence ✱vēnŭĕram ＞ vẹngra. The inflection is as follows:—
| fọra | forám | ágra | agrám |
| fọras | forátz forás | ágras | agrátz agrás |
| fọra | fọran | ágra | ágran |
1. Faire has féra (cf. feron) beside féira.
2. For sáupra, cf. § [148], (2), and § [184], (4), 1, and § [192].
3. Devér has beside dégra a form déura, evidently influenced by the new conditional, deuría.
4. Páisser, plazér have beside págra, plágra the forms paisséra, plazéra.
188. Strong verbs of the -sī class regularly form their old conditional on the same plan as the 3d pers. pl. of the preterit (§ [183]): (dīxĕram) díra, cf. díron; (✱prēsĕram) prẹira, cf. prẹiron; (arsĕram) arsęra, cf. arsęron.
189. It will be noted that in all verbs, weak and strong, the old conditional may be constructed from the 3d pers. pl. of the preterit by changing -on to -a.
Imperfect Subjunctive.
190. The Provençal imperfect subjunctive came from the Latin pluperfect subjunctive, which in Vulgar Latin assumed the functions of the imperfect and generally displaced it, its own place having been taken by a compound form: see § [141], (2).
191. For weak verbs the basis was the contracted form of the first and fourth conjugations (amāssem ＜ amāvĭssem, audīssem ＜ audīvĭssem); weak verbs of third conjugation had a similar analogical form (✱vēndęssem). First conjugation verbs substituted ę for á, as in the perfect and the old conditional: § [175], (4); § [186]. The Provençal types are: amęs, vendęs, auzís. The inflection is:
| amęs | amessẹm | auzís | auzissẹm |
| amęsses | amessẹtz -ẹs | auzísses | auzissẹtz -ẹs |
| amęs | amęssen -on -o | auzís | auzíssen -on -o |
192. Strong verbs regularly made their imperfect directly from the Vulgar Latin form of the pluperfect: fecĭssem ＞ fezẹs, fŭĭssem ✱fŭssem ＞ fọs, vidĭssem ＞ vezẹs, venĭssem ✱venuĭssem ＞ venguẹs; dixĭssem ＞ dissẹs, ✱pre(n)sĭssem ＞ prezẹs; habuĭssem ＞ aguẹs, potuĭssem ＞ poguẹs, voluĭssem ＞ volguẹs, sapuĭssem ＞ saubẹs saupẹs (§ [65], P, 3). The inflection is:—
| fọs | fossẹm | aguẹs | aguessẹm, acsẹm |
| fọsses | fossẹtz -ẹs | aguẹsses | aguessẹtz -ẹs, acsẹtz -ẹs |
| fọs | fọssen -on -o | aguẹs | aguẹssen -on -o |
1. The syncopated forms in the 1st and 2d pers. pl. are common to the -uī class: decsém, iacsém, pocsém, saupsém.
2. In the 3d pers. pl. -an sometimes takes the place of -en or -on: mezéssan, saubéssan. This ending is doubtless borrowed from the present subjunctive and the old conditional.
3. Vezér has vis beside vezés. From faire we find in the 3d pers. pl. fésson.
4. Metre has mezés, due, no doubt, to the analogy of mes and of prezés.
193. Some dialects have an ending -a, -as, -a, -ám, -átz, an, borrowed from the present subjunctive and the old conditional, but added to the stem of the imperfect subjunctive: chantęssa, vendęssa, floríssa; fọssa.