Re: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory?

On Tue, 20 Apr 2004 13:33:51 +0000, elmeras2000
<jer@...> wrote:

>Greek has abolished the alternation so we have
>only /ho/ and /to-/ as far as can be seen through the noise of later
>contraction (the gen. is toû).

But *kWesyo gives teo, teû, which proves that toû < *tosyo.

>But Latin istum, istud forms the gen.
>isti:us which must be the same ending as in eiius.

Or, rather, the same ending as quoios/cuius, huius.

>Gothic and the
>other Germanic languages agree on having e.g. thana, thata but gen.
>this. And Old Prussian combines stan, sta with gen. stessei,
>steisse, stesse, steisei with -e- as one of the few stable points of
>the spelling. The gen. of Slavic tU is togo and helps little, that
>of Lith. tàs is to~, the old ablative.

Again, showing that the vowel here was /o/ [*to-od > to~,
togo], and not /e/ as we have in *e-od > jo~ / ego, *k^e-od

> s^jo~ / sego, and in the true genitive *kWe-syo > c^eso.

The difference between -os/-osyo and -is/-esyo is embedded
in Slavic grammar as *kU-to G. kogo "who?" vs. *c^I-to G.
c^eso (~ c^ego) "what?".

>The Albanian possessive
>pronouns are inflected with accent on a preceding article, and in
>the gen.masc. we have ti-m, ti-t, ti-në, ti-j (the structure is seen
>in 2sg acc. tën-d, Geg tân); I see no way this could be *tosyo,
>while *tesyo looks fine.
>
>Whoever makes a case for an IE form "*tosyo" on this basis is
>distancing himself from the very idea of comparative linguistics.

Oh come on. *-osyo is the thematic ending, *-esyo
athematic. Pronouns that are thematic in the nom/acc
(*so/*tom/*tod, *kWos/*kWom/*kWod, *yos/*yom/*yod) make the
Gsg. in *-osyo (*tosyo, *kWosyo, *yosyo), like the thematic
adjectives and nouns (*-os/*-om, G. *-osyo). Pronouns that
are athematic (*is/*im/*id, *k^is/*k^im/*k^id, *kWis/*kWim/
*kWid) make the Gsg. in *-esyo (*esyo, *k^esyo, *kWesyo).
It's as simple as that.

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