19. Personal pronouns
1st person
==========
Singular.
Nominative
Skt Av OCS Lith Hitt Grk
ahám az(am), as (j)azU às^, ès^ uk egó:
*eg^hóm *eg^h(om) *eg^(om) *eg^ *ug^ *eg^ó:
Lat OIr Alb TochB Gmc Arm
ego mé u(në) ñäs' *ik es
*eg^o: *me *u- *me-g^ *eg^(-) *eg^
PIE *é-g^, from deictic *e- + emphatic *-g^ (*-g^h in Indo-Iranian).
Optionally augmented with what look like the verbal 1sg. endings *-om
(Indo-Iranian, extended to most nominatives of the personal pronouns)
or *-o: (Latin, Greek). Germanic *ek, *ik could be from *eg^ directly
or from *eg^om or *eg^o: (Runic -ika, Dutch emphatic ikke ?). Slavic
(j)azU (with Winter's lengthening before *g^) could likewise reflect
either *eg^ or *eg^om. OLith. es^ and Armenian es point to *ek^, by
hardening of *-g^ in the Auslaut.
OIr. mé (*mé) and Tocharian ñäs' (*me-g^(e)) are from the oblique.
The original pre-PIE form, *mu, has not survived anywhere, unless it
is reflected in unclear Hittite uk (*u-g^), Alb. u(në) and TochA
(fem.) ñuk.
Accusative
Skt Av OCS Lith Hitt Grk
má:m mene manè ammuk emé
*mé:-m = G = G *h1mu-g^ *e-mé
Lat OIr Alb TochB Gmc Arm
me: më = nom *mik is
*me: *me *me-g^ *me-g^ *e-me-g^
PIE *(e)mé (Skt. has added acc. -m, B-S has the genitive form). We
would expect *mwé (like *twé, *swé), but *mw gave *m. The *e- in
Greek and Armenian may be the same deictic *e- as in the nominative.
Hittite perhaps *(h1)e-mú-g^, like *h1e-g^o-m(u) > *eg^om, but in
different order (cf. also Luw. NA amu).
Enclitic
Skt. Av. OCS Lith Hitt Grk
ma: ma(:) meN -mu me
*me(:) *me(:) *me-m *mu *me
Lat OIr Alb TochB Gmc Arm
-ñ
*me
PIE *me (Slavic with acc. *-m). Hittite *mu, from the old nominative.
Genitive
Skt Av OCS Lith Hitt Grk
máma m&:na: mene mane~Ns amme:l emoû
*méme *mene *mene *menems *h1mel *emesyo
Lat OIr Alb TochB Gmc Arm
mei: ñi *mi:na im
*mey- *mey? *mey-n- *emV(-)
PIE *méne dissimilated from *méme (except in Sanskrit). From **mú-ma >
*mémWe (cf. **túma -> *té(m)we > *téwe, **súma -> *sé(m)we > *séwe).
Hittite has genitive -el, as in all pronouns. Latin and Germanic,
probably also Greek and Armenian, have forms derived from the
possessive adjective (*mey-os, *mey-n-os, *em-os)
Dative
Skt Av OCS Lith Hitt Grk
máhya(m) mabya(h) mIne^ mán emoí
*még^hyo(m) *mebhyo(s) *menoi ? *emoí
Lat OIr Alb TochB Gmc Arm
mihi: *miz inj
*meg^hoi *mes *emeg^h-
PIE *(e)meg^hyo, with thematic ending -o (without -i, as in the
Hittite allative). Curiously, the 1st person has *g^hi, while the 2/3
persons have *bhi (*twebhio, *swebhio). Cf. Latin hic "here" (1st
person deixis) < *g^hi-ke?
Enclitic (Gen/Dat)
Skt Av OCS Lith Hitt Grk
me: mai mi moi
*moi *moi *moi *moi
Lat OIr Alb TochB Gmc Arm
PIE *moi.
The other cases (Loc., Ins., Abl.) are secondarily derived from the
accusative/enclitic *me.
Plural.
Nominative
Skt Av OCS Lith Hitt Grk
vayám vae:m my me~s we:s he:meîs
*weyóm *weyóm *mo:s *me:s *weyes *n.smeyes
Lat OIr Alb TochB Gmc Arm
no:s sní na, ne wes *wi:z mek`
*no:s *smeyes *nos,*no:s *we:s *weyes *mesW
PIE *wey (*mWey) and *mesW (*m(W)esW) from oblique *mu-át(i) > *mWéy
and nominative *mu-át(u) > *mWésW, respectively. Slavic has my after
2pl. vy. Greek and Celtic have forms based on acc. *n.sme- (with loss
of *n.- in Celtic due to 2pl. nom *sweyes). Latin and Albanian are
based on oblique enclitic *no(:)s. TochB should have palatalized *w-
before front vowel, but hasn't (2pl is already yes, with the vocalism
of the 1pl.).
Accusative
Skt Av OCS Lith Hitt Grk
asmá:n ahma ny mùs anza:s he:mâs
*n.smé:n *nsmé *no:s *mons *ns-os *nsme-
Lat OIr Alb TochB Gmc Arm
no:s na wes *uns mez
*no:s *nos *we:s *n.s *mes-g^he?
PIE *n.smé (Slavic, Latin, Albanian are based on enclitic *no(:)s;
Lith., Arm., Toch based on the nominative).
Enclitic
Skt Av OCS Lith Hitt Grk
nas na(:)h nasU -nas
*nos *no(:)s *no:som *no(:)s
Lat OIr Alb TochB Gmc Arm
-me
*mos
PIE *nos, *no:s. Tocharian -me < *mo(:)s after the 2/3rd person
enclitics (*-smo(:)s).
The other plural cases are secondarily based on the accusative or the
enclitic.
Dual.
Nominative
Skt OCS Lith Hitt Grk
vá:m, a:vám ve^ nó:
*wéh1om, *nh3wóm *weh1 *noh3
Lat OIr Alb TochB Gmc Arm
wene *wit
*weh1-noh3 *we-du
PIE *wéh1. Greek nó: based on enclitic *noh3. In Tocharian, we would
expect *we:-no: (with the default nominal dual marker *-no:) to have
given *wyene and then Toch B +yene, but as yene is the 2 du. form,
palatalization was abandoned here, explaining attested wene.
Accusative
Skt Av OCS Lith Hitt Grk
a:vá:m
*n.h3wé-om
Lat OIr Alb TochB Gmc Arm
wene *unk-
*weh1-noh3 *nh3w-
PIE *n.h3wé. Tocharian = nominative. Germanic shows hardening of the
sequence *-Hw- to *-k-.
Enclitic
Skt Av OCS Lith Hitt Grk
na:u na
*noh3 *noh3
Lat OIr Alb TochB Gmc Arm
PIE *noh3.
The other dual cases based on the accusative or the enclitic.
2nd. person
===========
Singular.
Nominative
Skt Av OCS Lith Hitt Grk
tvám tv&:m, tu: ty tù zik sú
*tu-óm *tuom, *tu: *tu: *tú: *tu:g^ *t(w)u
Lat OIr Alb TochB Gmc Arm
tu: tú ti t(u)we *Tu(:) du
*tu: *tu(:) *tu: *tu-om *tu(:) *dhu(:)
PIE *tu(:), with suffixed *-om in Indo-Iranian and Tocharian. Hittite
(and Albanian) *tu: > ti. Greek s- analogical after the oblique (with
s < *tW). Armenian d- as in the demonstrative pronoun *to- > d-.
Accusative
Skt Av OCS Lith Hitt Grk
tvá:m Tva:m tebe tavè tuk sé
*tué:m *twe:m *tebhe *tewe *tug^ *twe
Lat OIr Alb TochB Gmc Arm
te: të ci *Tik k`ez
*t(w)e: *t(w)e *tewe *teg^ *twe-g^he
PIE *twé(:). Slavic has *bh from the dative, Balto-Slavic *tewe = G,
as is Tocharian *cäwyä (B. ci, A. cu).
Enclitic
Skt Av OCS Lith Hitt Grk
tva: Tva(:) teN -ta, -tu se
*twe: *twe: *te-m *to, *tu *twe
Lat OIr Alb TochB Gmc Arm
-c
*te
PIE *te. Indo-Iranian and Greek have analogical *twe.
Genitive
Skt Av OCS Lith Hitt Grk
táva tava tebe tave~Ns tue:l soû
*téwe *tewe *tebhe *tewens *twe-el *twesyo
Lat OIr Alb TochB Gmc Arm
tui: täñ *Ti:na k`o
*tew-y- ? *tei-n- *two-
PIE *tewe (Slavic *tebhe after the dative). Forms derived from the
possessive adjective in Greek, Latin, Germanic and Armenian.
Dative
Skt Av OCS Lith Hitt Grk
túbhyam tabya(h) tebê táu soí
*tuébhyom *tebhyos *tebhoi *tew *twoi
Lat OIr Alb TochB Gmc Arm
tibi: *Tiz k`ez
*tebhoi *tes *twe-g^he
PIE *twébhyo(i) / *túbhyo(i).
Enclitic
Skt Av OCS Lith Hitt Grk
te: tai ti soi
*toi *toi *toi *twoi
Lat OIr Alb TochB Gmc Arm
PIE *toi. Greek analogical *twoi.
Plural.
Nominative
Skt Av OCS Lith Hitt Grk
yu:yám yu:z^am, yu:s^ vy ju~s sume:s humeîs
*yu:yom *yu:s(om) *wo:s/*u:s *ju:s *sweyes *usmeyes
Lat OIr Alb TochB Gmc Arm
vo:s sí ju yes *ju(:)z duk`
*wo:s *sweyes *yu:s *ye:s *yu:s *(dh)usW
PIE either old nominative *(y)u(:)s (Skt, Av, ?Slav, Lith, Alb, Toch,
Gmc, Arm), with dissimilatory loss of *s- and regular development **we
> *u, or old oblique *sWey(-) (Hitt, OIr). Slavic (unless directly
from *u:s ?), Greek, and Latin have accusative/enclitic forms.
Armenian d- as in the 2sg.
Accusative
Skt Av OCS Lith Hitt Grk
yus.mán vy jùs suma:s humâs
*usmén *wo:s *jons *swo:s *usme-
Lat OIr Alb TochB Gmc Arm
vo:s ju yes *izw- jez
*wo:s *yu:s *ye:s *iswe- *ye-g^he
PIE *usmé, Germanic i- for u- after the nominative. Other forms
enclitic (Slavic, Hitt [unless from *usme- > *sume-]?, Latin) or
analogical after the nominative (Lith, Alb, Toch, Arm).
Enclitic
Skt Av OCS Lith Hitt Grk
vas va(:)h vasU -smas
*wos *wo(:)s *wo:som *-smos
Lat OIr Alb TochB Gmc Arm
-me
*-smos
PIE *wo(:)s or *smos.
Dual.
Nominative
Skt Av OCS Lith Hitt Grk
yuvám va sphó:
*yúh3om *woh3 *sWoh3
Lat OIr Alb TochB Gmc Arm
yene *yut
*ye:no: *yu-du
PIE *(y)uh3 or *sWéh3 (= Grk. sphó:, unless, as is more likely, from
enclitic *sWoh3). Slavic = encl. *woh3.
Accusative
Skt Av OCS Lith Hitt Grk
yuvá:m
*yuh3oom
Lat OIr Alb TochB Gmc Arm
yene *inkW-
*ye:no: *inh3w-
PIE *uh3wé (Germanic), *uh3ó (Sanskrit). Gmc. *inkW(iz) has i- for u-
from the nominative, -n- from the 1du. (*unk(iz)), and *kW from
hardening of *-h3w-.
Enclitic
Skt Av OCS Lith Hitt Grk
va:m va
*woh3m *woh3
Lat OIr Alb TochB Gmc Arm
PIE *woh3, *sWoh3 (= Grk. nom. sphó:)
3rd. person / reflexive
=======================
Singular.
Nominative
PIE nominative **su(:) has not survived the semantic shift to a
reflexive pronoun. Skt. has the analogical nom. svayám "self".
Accusative
Skt Av OCS Lith Hitt Grk
svá sebe savè hé
*swé *sebhe *sewe *s(w)é
Lat OIr Alb TochB Gmc Arm
se: *sik
*s(w)e: *s(w)eg^
PIE *swé(:). Slavic has *bh from the dative, Balto-Slavic *sewe = G.
Enclitic
Skt Av OCS Lith Hitt Grk
seN -za he
*sem *tyo? *s(w)e
Lat OIr Alb TochB Gmc Arm
PIE *se. Hittite -za (Luwian -ti) probably unrelated.
Genitive
Skt Av OCS Lith Hitt Grk
xvaNhe sebe save~Ns hoû
*sebhe *sewens *s(w)esyo
Lat OIr Alb TochB Gmc Arm
sui: s.äñ *si:na
*sew-y- sunei? *sei-n-
PIE *sewe (Slavic *sebhe after the dative).
Dative
Skt Av OCS Lith Hitt Grk
hva:vo:ya(h) sebê sáu hoî
*suebhyo(s) *sebhoi *sew *s(w)oi
Lat OIr Alb TochB Gmc Arm
sibi: *siz
*sebhoi *ses
PIE *swébhyo(i) / *súbhyo(i).
Enclitic
Skt Av OCS Lith Hitt Grk
ho:i si hoi
*soi *soi *s(w)oi
Lat OIr Alb TochB Gmc Arm
PIE *soi.
Plural/Dual
Only Greek has a plural: N. spheîs, A. sphâs, G. sphôn, D. sphísi(n),
presumably from *sWey- (Anlaut *sph- [as in the 2nd person] probably
having originated regularly in the 2du/refl. acc. form *sWh3wé >
*sphé).
The development of the system can be reconstructed as follows. For
the most remote stage, only a nominative (ergative) and an oblique
(absolutive) can be reconstructed: 1st. person *mu ~ *ma, 2nd. person
*tu ~ *ta, 3rd. person *su ~ *sa. The plural forms were (nom./obl.)
*mu-átu ~ *mu-áti, *tu-átu ~ *tu-áti and *su-átu ~ *su-áti; dual
*mu-íku ~ *mu-íki, *tu-íku ~ *tu-íki, *su-íku ~ *su-íki.
In the singular, the oblique survived as an unstressed enclitic. In
the dual and plural, the oblique forms disappeared or were shifted to
nominative function, especially in the 1st person: oblique *wey- is
reflected in Indo-Iranian, Hittite, Tocharian and Germanic; nominative
*me(:)s(W) only in Balto-Slavic and Armenian, while Greek, Latin,
Albanian and Celtic have once again shifted the accusative (*nsme-,
*no(:)s) to the nominative. Cf. the second person, where oblique
*sWey- is reflected only in Hittite and Celtic, nominative *ju(:)s(W)
in Indo-Iranian, Balto-Slavic, Albanian, Tocharian, Germanic and
Armenian, with Greek and Latin (*uhme-, *wo:s) once again using the
younger accusative as a nominative. In the dual, neither expected
nominative +móh3 nor oblique +sWéh1 have left any traces.
A new genitive/accusative was made my suffixing *-ma to the
nominative.
Although this element *-ma is likely to be identical in origin with
the acc. suffix *-m, unlike what's the case in the nominal and other
pronominal paradigms, it was added only _after_ the loss of final
short vowels (otherwise **mú-ma would have given +méw instead of
*méme, and *muatumá something like +m(e)h1mé instead of *nsmé). This
is also why the final vowel of *-ma behaves as a thematic vowel (e.g.
it is retained in unstressed position in G. méne, téwe, séwe).
In the singular, the forms *múma, *túma, *súma gave *múmWa, *túmWa,
*súmWa with regular labialization of *m after stressed *ú. Only after
that did the stress shift to the ending to differentiate the genitive
from accusative *mumWá, *tumWá, *sumWá > *mwé [> *mé], *twé, *swé. In
the plural and dual, only the forms with final accent have survived,
and they have *-mé as expected in the plural (where there never was a
stressed *ú before the *m). The dual, however, has *-wé after *h3 (=
**xW) by assimilation (cf. the stronger vowel rounding effect of *h3
as compared to *kW, *sW or *mW etc.).
The dative forms in *-g^hio, *-bhio were only created _after_ the
thematic vowel lengthening rule had stopped working, otherwise we
would have had *móg^hyo, *twóbhyo, *swóbhyo. The locative *-i in the
gen/dat enclitic, on the other hand, was added before/during the
working of the law, since we have *moi, *toi, *soi.
The plural and dual enclitics were formed after zero grade and the
assimilation/dissimilation of *mWsmé, *mWh3wé, *sWswé, *sWh3wé to
*n.smé, *n.h3wé, *usmé, *uh3wé, given that the results are *nos,
*noh3, *wos, *woh3. They are probably older than the addition of *y-
to the 2pl./du. pronouns, as we have *ismé, *ih3wé only in Germanic
(*izwiz, *i(n)kwiz), which can be explained as later analogy.
The other cases (Loc., Ins., Abl. sg; Gen, Dat, Loc, Ins, Abl pl./du.)
do not appear to show a common pattern, and were probably created only
after the breakup of PIE, mostly based on the enclitic or stressed
accusative forms, or on the possessive adjectives in the case of the
G.pl/du.
Schematically:
1. "I"
Nom **mú > [+mú(:), replaced by *é-g^(-)]
Gen **mú má > **múma > **mémWe > *méme > *méne
Acc **memWé > **mwé > *mé(:) [in part *e-mé(:), *e- from nom.]
Dat **me-g^hi-o > *még^hyo(i)
Obl **ma > encl. *me
Loc **ma-i > encl. *moi
pl.
Nom **mu-átu > **m(W)ésW > *mé(:)sW
Acc **mu-átu má > **mWasW-má > **msWmé > *n.smé(:)
Enc *ns(mé) > *no(:)s
Obl **mu-áti > **mWéy > *wéy(-esW)
du.
Nom **mu-íku > **m(W)éxW > [+móh3]
Acc **mu-íku má > **mWíxW-má > **mWh3wé > *n.h3wé(:)
Enc *nh3(we) > *noh3
Obl **mu-íki > **mWéh1 > *wéh1
2. "you"
Nom **tú > *tú(:)
Gen **tú má > **túma > **témWe > *tewe
Acc **temWé > *twé(:)
Dat **twe-bhi-o(i) > *twébhyo(i)/*túbhyo(i)
Obl **ta > *te
Loc **ta-i > *toi
pl.
Nom **tu-átu > **(s)WésW > *úsW > *yú(:)sW
Acc **tu-átu má > **sWásW-má > **(s)WsWmé > *usmé(:), *sWsmé(:)
(*smé(:))
Enc ws(me) > *wo(:)s ; sWs(me) > *sWo(:)s; (*smé > *smo(:)s)
Obl **tu-áti > **sWéy > *sWéy(-esW)
du.
Nom **tu-íku > **(s)WéxW > *(y)úh3, {*sWéh3 merges with enc. *sWoh3}
Acc **tu-íku má > **sWíxW-má > **(s)Wh3wé > *uh3wé(:), *sWh3wé(:)
Enc wh3(we) > *woh3, sWh3(we) > *sWoh3
Obl **tu-íki > **(s)Wéh1 > {*(y)úh1 merges with *(y)úh3}, [+sWéh1]
3. "he/she/it" > "self"
Nom **sú > [+sú(:)]
Gen **sú má > **súma > **sémWe > *séwe
Obl **semWé > *swé(:)
Dat **swé-bhi-o > *swébhyo(i)/*súbhyo(i)
Obl **sa > *se
Loc **sa-i > *soi
pl.
Nom **su-átu > [+sé(:)sW]
Acc **su-átu má > **sWasW-má > **sWsWmé > *sWsmé(:) (*smé(:))
Enc sWs(me) > *sWo(:)s (*sm(é) > *smo(:)s)
Obl **su-áti > **sWéy
du.
Nom **su-íku > {*sWéh3 merges with enc. *sWoh3}
Acc **su-íku má > **sWíxW-má > *sWh3wé(:)
Enc sWh3(we) > *sWoh3
Obl **su-íki > [+sWéh1]
=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...