"eti" meaning in Proto-Celtic

{
  "descendants": [
    {
      "depth": 1,
      "templates": [
        {
          "args": {
            "1": "cel-gau",
            "2": "eti",
            "3": "t-ic"
          },
          "expansion": "Gaulish: eti, t-ic",
          "name": "desc"
        }
      ],
      "text": "Gaulish: eti, t-ic"
    },
    {
      "depth": 1,
      "templates": [
        {
          "args": {
            "1": "sga",
            "2": "-"
          },
          "expansion": "Old Irish:",
          "name": "desc"
        },
        {
          "args": {
            "1": "formed absolute and deuterotonic verb forms"
          },
          "expansion": "formed absolute and deuterotonic verb forms",
          "name": "n-g"
        }
      ],
      "text": "Old Irish: formed absolute and deuterotonic verb forms"
    },
    {
      "depth": 1,
      "templates": [
        {
          "args": {
            "1": "cel-bry-pro",
            "2": "-"
          },
          "expansion": "Proto-Brythonic:",
          "name": "desc"
        },
        {
          "args": {
            "1": "formed absolute verbal forms"
          },
          "expansion": "formed absolute verbal forms",
          "name": "n-g"
        }
      ],
      "text": "Proto-Brythonic: formed absolute verbal forms"
    }
  ],
  "etymology_templates": [
    {
      "args": {
        "1": "cel-pro",
        "2": "ine-pro",
        "3": "*éti"
      },
      "expansion": "Proto-Indo-European *éti",
      "name": "inh"
    },
    {
      "args": {
        "1": "cel-pro",
        "2": "ine-pro",
        "3": "*h₁ésti",
        "t": "is"
      },
      "expansion": "Proto-Indo-European *h₁ésti (“is”)",
      "name": "der"
    }
  ],
  "etymology_text": "From Proto-Indo-European *éti. The particle *eti is currently the mainstream explanation for the difference between the absolute and conjunct forms in Old Irish and Old Welsh. However, other explanations of the absolute and conjunct have been proposed:\n* Cowgill and Kortlandt reconstruct this particle as *es and derive it from Proto-Indo-European *h₁ésti (“is”).\n* Roma and Budassi reconstruct subject pronouns instead of *eti as the clitic(s) that differentiated absolute and conjunct forms. They believe that their reconstruction also has the advantage of explaining the subject pronouns (like mé, tú, é, etc.) not occurring as subjects of inflected verbs in Old Irish.\n* McCone opposes all forms of the “particle hypothesis” and claims the postulated sentence particle faces more difficulties than it solves and requires numerous dubious ad hoc phonological assumptions. Instead he postulates the generalization of topicalized clause-initial verbs whose final -i was shielded by other enclitics if present, and then homogenization of forms with and without following enclitics in this position.",
  "head_templates": [
    {
      "args": {
        "1": "cel-pro",
        "2": "particle"
      },
      "expansion": "*eti",
      "name": "head"
    }
  ],
  "lang": "Proto-Celtic",
  "lang_code": "cel-pro",
  "original_title": "Reconstruction:Proto-Celtic/eti",
  "pos": "particle",
  "senses": [
    {
      "categories": [
        {
          "kind": "other",
          "name": "Proto-Celtic entries with incorrect language header",
          "parents": [
            "Entries with incorrect language header",
            "Entry maintenance"
          ],
          "source": "w"
        },
        {
          "kind": "other",
          "name": "Proto-Celtic particles",
          "parents": [],
          "source": "w"
        }
      ],
      "glosses": [
        "affirmative clause particle"
      ],
      "id": "en-eti-cel-pro-particle-diGRsxkI",
      "tags": [
        "reconstruction"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "word": "eti"
}

{
  "descendants": [
    {
      "depth": 1,
      "templates": [
        {
          "args": {
            "1": "cel-gau",
            "2": "eti",
            "3": "t-ic"
          },
          "expansion": "Gaulish: eti, t-ic",
          "name": "desc"
        }
      ],
      "text": "Gaulish: eti, t-ic"
    },
    {
      "depth": 1,
      "templates": [
        {
          "args": {
            "1": "sga",
            "2": "-"
          },
          "expansion": "Old Irish:",
          "name": "desc"
        },
        {
          "args": {
            "1": "formed absolute and deuterotonic verb forms"
          },
          "expansion": "formed absolute and deuterotonic verb forms",
          "name": "n-g"
        }
      ],
      "text": "Old Irish: formed absolute and deuterotonic verb forms"
    },
    {
      "depth": 1,
      "templates": [
        {
          "args": {
            "1": "cel-bry-pro",
            "2": "-"
          },
          "expansion": "Proto-Brythonic:",
          "name": "desc"
        },
        {
          "args": {
            "1": "formed absolute verbal forms"
          },
          "expansion": "formed absolute verbal forms",
          "name": "n-g"
        }
      ],
      "text": "Proto-Brythonic: formed absolute verbal forms"
    }
  ],
  "etymology_templates": [
    {
      "args": {
        "1": "cel-pro",
        "2": "ine-pro",
        "3": "*éti"
      },
      "expansion": "Proto-Indo-European *éti",
      "name": "inh"
    },
    {
      "args": {
        "1": "cel-pro",
        "2": "ine-pro",
        "3": "*h₁ésti",
        "t": "is"
      },
      "expansion": "Proto-Indo-European *h₁ésti (“is”)",
      "name": "der"
    }
  ],
  "etymology_text": "From Proto-Indo-European *éti. The particle *eti is currently the mainstream explanation for the difference between the absolute and conjunct forms in Old Irish and Old Welsh. However, other explanations of the absolute and conjunct have been proposed:\n* Cowgill and Kortlandt reconstruct this particle as *es and derive it from Proto-Indo-European *h₁ésti (“is”).\n* Roma and Budassi reconstruct subject pronouns instead of *eti as the clitic(s) that differentiated absolute and conjunct forms. They believe that their reconstruction also has the advantage of explaining the subject pronouns (like mé, tú, é, etc.) not occurring as subjects of inflected verbs in Old Irish.\n* McCone opposes all forms of the “particle hypothesis” and claims the postulated sentence particle faces more difficulties than it solves and requires numerous dubious ad hoc phonological assumptions. Instead he postulates the generalization of topicalized clause-initial verbs whose final -i was shielded by other enclitics if present, and then homogenization of forms with and without following enclitics in this position.",
  "head_templates": [
    {
      "args": {
        "1": "cel-pro",
        "2": "particle"
      },
      "expansion": "*eti",
      "name": "head"
    }
  ],
  "lang": "Proto-Celtic",
  "lang_code": "cel-pro",
  "original_title": "Reconstruction:Proto-Celtic/eti",
  "pos": "particle",
  "senses": [
    {
      "categories": [
        "Proto-Celtic entries with incorrect language header",
        "Proto-Celtic lemmas",
        "Proto-Celtic particles",
        "Proto-Celtic terms derived from Proto-Indo-European",
        "Proto-Celtic terms inherited from Proto-Indo-European"
      ],
      "glosses": [
        "affirmative clause particle"
      ],
      "tags": [
        "reconstruction"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "word": "eti"
}