From: Richard Wordingham
Message: 32617
Date: 2004-05-15
--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, enlil@... wrote:
Jens:
> > We were talking about the *-e-s of the 2sg of verbs which is
*only*
> > found with thematic stems and therefore must contain the thematic
> > vowel. That makes nom.sg. *-os and 2sg *-es a minimal pair,
Glen:
> No it doesn't. But granted the solution is subtle so I wouldn't
> blame you for not seeing it. The fact is that *-es alternates with
> *-esi with non-final *s. Analogy preserved *e by keeping voiceless
> *s throughout the 2ps.
Doesn't the proposed analogical change in the thematic 2s *-&z > *-
&s following *-&si thereby imply a phonemic contrast between
final /s/ and /z/?
If one's willing to accept analogical explanations though, what
stops secondary *-os being remodelled as *-es after primary *-esi?
This seems the simplest explanation if one won't accept a
contrast /s/ ~ /z/.
Richard.