Editing Germanic weak verb (section)

===Origin of dental suffix===
The origin of the dental suffix is uncertain. Perhaps the most commonly held theory is that it evolved out of a [[Periphrasis|periphrastic]] construction with the verb {{wikt-lang|gem-pro|*dōną}} ''to do'': Germanic *{{lang|gem-x-proto|lubō-dē-}} ("love-did") > {{lang|gem-x-proto|*lubōdē-}} > Old English {{lang|ang|lufode}} > ''loved'' or *{{lang|gem-x-proto|salbō-dē-}} ("salve-did", i.e., "put salve") > *{{lang|gem-x-proto|salbōdē-}} > Old English {{lang|ang|sealfode}} > ''salved''. That would be analogous to [[do-support]] in modern English: ''I did love'', ''I did salve''.

The common PIE root {{lang|ine-x-proto|*dʰeh₁-}} meaning 'do' was a root [[aorist]] and so did not take a perfect. However, it took a reduplicating present. The imperfect of the root, which filled in the simple past in Germanic, is probably the origin of the dental suffix.

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Periphrastic origin of dental suffix
! PIE imperfect of "do"
! Proto-Germanic past of "do"
! Gothic weak preterite ending
|-
| rowspan=3 | Singular
| {{lang|ine-x-proto|*dʰe-dʰéh₁-m}}
| {{lang|gem-x-proto|*dedǭ}}
| {{lang|got-Latn|-da}}
|-
| {{lang|ine-x-proto|*dʰe-dʰéh₁-s}}
| {{lang|gem-x-proto|*dedēz}}
| {{lang|got-Latn|-des}}
|-
| {{lang|ine-x-proto|*dʰe-dʰéh₁-t}}
| {{lang|gem-x-proto|*dedē}}
| {{lang|got-Latn|-da}}
|-
| rowspan=3 | Plural
| {{lang|ine-x-proto|*dʰe-dʰh₁-m̥é}}
| {{lang|gem-x-proto|*dēdum}}
| {{lang|got-Latn|-dēdum}}
|-
| {{lang|ine-x-proto|*dʰe-dʰh₁-té}}
| {{lang|gem-x-proto|*dédd → *dēdud}} (by analogy)
| {{lang|got-Latn|-dēduþ}}
|-
| {{lang|ine-x-proto|*dʰe-dʰh₁-n̥t}}
| {{lang|gem-x-proto|*dēdun}}
| {{lang|got-Latn|-dēdun}}
|}

That view is not without objections:{{citation needed|date=September 2017}}
* Germanic has long -ē- in the plural, which cannot directly reflect the Proto-Indo-European situation.
* Reduplication is only in the Gothic plural, not in the singular.

The objections are sometimes answered as follows:{{citation needed|date=September 2017}}
* There might have been a refashioning according to cases like {{lang|gem-x-proto|gēbun,}} namely, {{lang|gem-x-proto|*gegbun > gēbun: *dedun → dēdun}}.
* Reduplication only in the plural can easily be explained by [[haplology]] in Proto-Germanic ({{lang|gem-x-proto|*dede-}} being reduced to {{lang|gem-x-proto|*de-}}) for the singular, with a later development of haplology for the plural in non-[[East Germanic languages]].

Another theory is that it came from a past participle ending, a final *''-daz'' from PIE *''-tos'' (compare Latin {{lang|la|amatus}}), with personal endings added to it at a later stage. That theory, however, is also disputed because of its inability to explain all the facts.

According to Hill (2010), the endings, which in the singular do not show reduplication in any Germanic language, continue the PIE subjunctive of the root aorist.{{cn |date=December 2024}}