(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:—