ROBIN MEYER REMODELLING THE HISTORICAL MORPHOLOGY OF THE CLASSICAL ARMENIAN -EAL PARTICIPLE The formation of the Classical Armenian past participle in -eal,

The formation of the Classical Armenian past participle in -eal, whose derivation from PIE *-lohas been recognised at least since MEILLET (1936), has traditionally been linked with the formation of the aorist. In synchronic terms, the participle of most verbs is formed on the basis of the aorist stem, so for example Arm. tesanem tesi, ptcp. teseal; a number of denominative verbs, however, form their participles on the basis of the present stem, type gorcem , ptcp. gorceal (JENSEN 1959:105 6). Concerning its historical morphology, there are a number of dissenting voices: it has been argued that the *-losuffix was added to the aorist stem (M 1930), derived from the present infinitive -el in analogy with the aorist (STEMPEL 1983), or otherwise formed directly from the verbal stem (KLINGENSCHMITT 1982), to name but a few. In all instances, however, a great number of the forms attested can only be arrived at through analogical spread of the formational pattern envisaged. All of these approaches fail to answer some important questions regarding the analysis of the participle in morphological terms: the fact that, depending on the individual verb, either present or aorist stem are taken as the basis for participle is left unexplained; in view of the variety of aorist formations, the uniformity of the supposedly aorist-based -eal participle remains unaccounted for; if it is believed that the past-marking suffix of the aorist is -< PIE *-s -, whereas the vocalism -eahas arisen only through a series of