Re: [tied] Nominative: A hybrid view

On Fri, 23 May 2003 04:12:44 +0000, Glen Gordon
<glengordon01@...> wrote:

>If *-d and *-t are interchangeable as you claim, then you can't object
>to me writing *-d. Secondly, since we both agree that a thematic vowel
>in *o suggests voicing, we should both agree that *-d is _voiced_, not
>voiceless, in the ablative.

The ablative ending of the o-stems is not *-od, it's *-õ:d (*-õ:t)
[Skt. -a:t, Av. -a:t~, Lat. -o:(d), OCS -a, Lith. -o], resulting from
the contraction of the thematic vowel *-o and the ending *-ot. The
thematic vowel appears as *-o- because the initial segment of the
ending is voiced, and is in fact a vowel.

>And I don't want to petty about the vowel quantity because it is
>observed to be short as Eva has even kindly pointed out. Even Miguel
>agrees with *-od as evidenced by:
>
> http://home.planet.nl/~mcv/PPIE/PPIE2.doc

That's old stuff. My current thinking is that the ablative and the
instrumental were originally a single case (**-at), giving stressed
*-ét > *-éh1 [instrumental] in the root and hysterodynamic stems,
unstressed *-ot [ablative] in the proterodynamic stems.

=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...