The Parent Suffix in Germanic Weak Verbs of Class III

1. Among the types of weak verbs occurring in Germanic, none has provoked more difference of opinion than that of Class III, and no other has so consistently eluded a believable analysis. As might be expected, most discussions of the subject lean heavily on the evidence provided by Gothic. In Gothic weak verbs of Class III, the most noticeable feature is the occurrence of a in some inflectional forms beside ai in others. Thus the present indicative active of the verb 'have' has sg. 1 hab-a but 2 hab-ais and 3 hab-aip, pi. 1 hob-am and 3 haband but 2 hab-aif. Similarly, the imperative has sg. 2 hab-ai and pi. 2 -air but pi. 3 -andau. On the other hand, a always appears in the infinitive (haban), in the present participle (habands), and throughout the passive indicative (e.g. pi. 1-3 habanda). Conversely, ai occurs in all forms of the preterit (e.g. ind. sg. 1 habaida, p.p. habaiks) and in nearly all optative forms, the sole exception being pres. act. 1 habau. 2. Attempts to explain this apparently arbitrary assignment of a and ai have been numerous. A long list of publications on the subject, together with bibliographical details, has already been given by Hermann Flasdieck in an exhaustive study relating principally to Old English, Untersuchungen uiber die germanischen schwachen Verben III. Klasse (unter besonderer Beruicksichtigung des Altenglischen), Anglia 59.1-192 (1935). Here, in the interest of brevity, older conflicting opinions will be merely summarized according to type, documentation being reserved for works that are either cited individually or have appeared since 1935. Following Bartholomae, some scholars (e.g. Streitberg, Hirt, Loewe) posit an originally athematic conjugation of Class III and assume that the Gothic a-forms represent IE e, as in L videre 'see' beside Go. witan 'observe', Lith. mineti beside Go. munan 'think'. Others (e.g. Osthoff, Kieckers, Flasdieck) object that pres. ind. act. p1. 3 -enti would produce Go. *-ind rather than -and, while still others reply that -entwould indeed become -indin initial syllalbes, as in wentos > Go. winds 'wind', but -and in unstressed noninitial syllables (e.g. H. Krahe, Hist. Lautu. Formenlehre des Got. ?93 [Heidelberg, 1948]). Inasmuch as athematic pres. ind. act. sg. 1 -e-mi would not produce Go. -a, most proponents of the e-theory ascribe this ending to the influence of the corresponding -o > -a of thematic verbs: hab-a 'I have' like bair-a 'I bear'. Other suggested interpretations would trace Go. sg 1 -a to -em with the secondary (!) ending -m (Hirt) or would explain all Gothic a-forms as transfers from thematic verbs (Brugmann, followed by E. Prokosch, Comp. Gc. Cr. 212 [Philadelphia, 1939]). 3. When the aias well as the a-forms are taken into consideration, the confusion becomes worse confounded. Even if it is conceded that -ewith an athematic ending might somehow appear as a in Go. pres. ind. act. sg. 1 haba beside pl. 1 habam, 3 haband, there still remains an awkward question: how could the same -ealso produce ai in such forms as sg. 2 habais and 3 habait? A few scholars