Re: [tied] Tyrrhenian and its relation to IE

----- Original Message -----

From: Glen Gordon

To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2001 4:07 PM

Subject: [tied] Tyrrhenian and its relation to IE

<snip>

 

The  accusative *-m is more likely to be
derived from an early ergative case and the lack of the ending in
inanimate noun stems relates to the probability that once upon a
time an inanimate noun could never be the agent of an action. But
then, that rule just makes logical sense, doesn't it?

[PCR]
There is nothing at all to lead one to the idea that -*m is derived from an ergative case. Ergative is simply an alternate method of marking the agent in a transitive construction.

 

Rather, if the two arguments of a transitive verb are both animate, -*m would identify the non-agent, i.e. the absolutive. Conversely, ergative -*s would identify the agent. Only one is really necessary.

 

Thus, a nominative -*s and accusative *-m in IE is redundant.

 

 

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, vindgá meiði a netr allar nío,
geiri vndaþr . . . a þeim meiþi, er mangi veit,
hvers hann af rótom renn." (Hávamál 138)