The discovery read in the previous article — that -mi is a fossil of the pronoun ma — actually goes one step further. Bopp had noticed that this ending itself comes in older and newer forms.
A heavy ending, and a light one
Sanskrit verbs have two kinds of forms: one ending in -mi (the “primary” ending, used for the present tense and the like), and one ending in just -m (the “secondary” ending, used for the past tense and the like). Bopp continues:
Die Secundärform beruht auf einer weiteren Schwächung von mi zu m… (The secondary form rests on a further weakening of mi to m…)
In other words, -mi and -m are the same single pronoun, ma, worn down to two different stages. The one closer to the older layer is -mi; the one worn down further still, over more time, is -m — inside a single ending, multiple eras lie folded over each other, like geological strata.
The same trace, left in the plural
Bopp offers evidence of this “wearing down” not only in the singular, but in the plural too.
…im Latein[ischen] noch alle Plural-Endungen auf mus, im Griech[ischen] alle auf μεν enden, während im Sanskrit das entsprechende mas nur den Primärformen geblieben ist… (…in Latin, all plural endings still end in mus, in Greek all in μεν, whereas in Sanskrit the corresponding mas has survived only in the primary forms…)
In Latin and Greek, the ending marking plural “we” has been leveled into a single shared shape (mus, μεν) regardless of the type of verb. Sanskrit, by contrast, still keeps the older form (mas) distinct from a more simplified one, both still in use. Sanskrit has preserved the “youngest” state of all — the idea read in another article, “language is an organism,” is at work here again, this time backed by concrete evidence.
Multiple eras, asleep inside one ending
What this close reading shows is the precision of Bopp’s theory. The claim that “an ending is a fossilized pronoun” doesn’t stop there. The very same pronoun wears down at a different rate, language by language, and even form by form within a single language — and that difference itself becomes a yardstick for measuring which language is older. Reading a single verb ending closely enough, Bopp demonstrates, is enough to reveal layer upon layer of history folded inside it.
Summary
| Point | Content |
|---|---|
| The two endings | Sanskrit’s primary ending -mi and secondary ending -m |
| Bopp’s explanation | The same pronoun, ma, worn down to two different stages |
| The confirmation in the plural | Latin and Greek leveled their endings to a single shape; Sanskrit kept the older distinction |
| The conclusion drawn | The degree of wear in an ending can measure a language’s “youth” |
In a nutshell — for Bopp, every single verb ending was a tree ring recording a language’s age. By reading the differences in how they had worn down, he made visible the flow of time itself running between eight languages.