Torsten:
>That explanation doesn't mesh well with your argument in[...]
Ugh. Only because you're not paying attention.
>[...]that the -xter ending you mention is "purely analogical" based
>on *p-x-ter "father", and your analysis of "brother" which provides an
>extra, unneeded -x- for that word. What would the original -ter
>ending of "father" be then? Nomen agentis?
I'm going to explain this one more time. The word *pxter-, whose
nominative is *pxte:r btw, is commonly analysed merely as *pax-
(*pah2-) "to provide, nourish" and *-ter- [agent], hence "provider".
That much is clear.
The original mother word was probably *ama- which became *ma-xter-
in order to rhyme with *pxter-. In other words, *-xter was added on to
the "mother" word by analogy with *pxter-. So now *pxter- was thought
of by Indo-European speakers to be *p(a)- + *-xter-. The new family
suffix *-xter- was thus born, whose origins are thereby analogical,
and it later spread from the "mother" and "father" words to other
related words like "brother". Since the "sister" word was already
*swesor- with the female *-sor- suffix already attached, *-xter- was
not added on.
This has absolutely nothing to do with *-ter- used in *kWo-ter- and is
more related to the agent marker *-ter-.
- gLeN
_________________________________________________________________
STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail