Re: Accusative was allative

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, mcv@... wrote:

> P&G <petegray@...> wrote:
>
> > Pardon me butting in. What *-s/*-i confusion? As far as I'm
> > aware, only
> > Greek and Latin have regularly replaced the old PIE nom plural
> > with an -i
> > ending, and only Latin regularly shows any -i forms in the

genitive.

>
> I think Celtic too has an o-stem nom.pl. based on *-oi and an o-

stem genitive singular in -i:. The nom.pl. in *-oi is also in Balto-
Slavic, and Albanian too I think.

>
> The Latin-Celtic o-stem gen.sg. in -i: is I believe merely a

special development of the inherited ending *-osyo (c.q. *-esyo in
some pronominal paradigms). In Latin, *sy became *y, and this is
basically what we still have (albeit augmented with an analogical
genitive ending -s) in the pronouns *kWosyo > *kWoyo > cuiu-s and
*esyo > *eyo > eius. Where the (initial) stress did not fall on
*oyo or *eyo, they became *i:o, as in <illi:u-s>, <isti:u-s>.
Unstressed final *i:o was further reduced to -i: in the nominal
stems (*ek^wosyo > *ekwoyo > ekwi:o > equi:).

>
> In Celtic, something similar happened. Old Lepontic still had a

gen.sg. ending -oiso (by metathesis from *-osyo). After the
dropping of *s, -oyo (-eyo) must have further developed into *-i:o

> -i:, except in Celtiberian, where the development was *-oyo > *-oo
> -o: (cf. Greek *-osyo > -oyo > -oo > -o: > -u).
>
> --
> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal

************
Yes, it's true. In proto-Albanian was an old plural ending in -oi
(notices first by Holger Pedersen), which, at the end of the word,
yields -i. PIE *wlkWos > ulk > ujk, but pl. ujq 'wolfs' from *wlkWoi

> ulki > ujq or *stoighos > shteg 'path', but pl. <shtigje> from

*stoighoi > shtegi > shtigje 'paths'. This paradigm was later
spreaded in, at most, all nouns ending in velars (early also in
labiovelars): <plak> 'old man>, <pleq> 'old men', <zog> 'bird',
<zogj> 'birds', <breg> 'coast', <brigje> 'coasts', etc.

Konushevci