From: Glen Gordon
Message: 8459
Date: 2001-08-11
>A very well-represented IE genitive is that in -*y(/*i), which is also (inYep, that's it, Pat. You just continue to make up genitive
>combination) a suffix forming adjectives.
>All case-endings derive from locational and directive postpositions;_________________________________________________________________
>Nostratic and earliest PIE had no case-endings per se but did have these
>postpositions (and nouns used as postpositions). Relationship was also
>simply expressed by simple juxtaposition: A B = A's B or = A-like B or =A
>near B, etc. In frequent cases, no postposition was necessary to designate
>the actor is an animate was combined with an inanimate noun: man tree cut,
>hardly = 'the tree cut the man'.
>
>The relationships covered by the blanket-term "genitive" are several; and
>possession is only one of them: nearness, sharing of essential qualities,
>etc. are also involved because the genitive had many uses in PIE that were
>formerly more distinctively expressed.
>
>The common IE genitive in -*s is probably a simple recycling of IE *se/o,
>'behind, with', found in Slavic *s/so.
>
>The accusative in *-m is probably just a postposition originally meaning
>'on(to)' (cf. Egyptian m) --- a way of designating which animate noun is
>getting the verbal action..
>
>The "nominative" in -*s is the same formant; and that is why a number of IE
>languages employ combined forms for genitives: *-s-yo.
>
>The *-n under discussion is probably, in origin, an inessive ('in the . .
>.') although there is a common plural in -*n also
>
>
>Pat
>
>PATRICK C. RYAN | PROTO-LANGUAGE@... (501) 227-9947 * 9115 W.
>34th St. Little Rock, AR 72204-4441 USA WEBPAGES: PROTO-LANGUAGE:
>http://www.geocities.com/proto-language/ and PROTO-RELIGION:
>http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/2803/proto-religion/indexR.html "Veit
>ec at ec hecc, vindg� mei�i a netr allar n�o, geiri vnda�r . . . a �eim
>mei�i, er mangi veit, hvers hann af r�tom renn." (H�vam�l 138)
>