From: Miguel Carrasquer
>--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:You're right. I don't know what I was thinking (too much
>> On Wed, 26 May 2004 02:23:33 +0200 (MET DST), Jens Elmegaard
>> Rasmussen <jer@...> wrote:
>> >> I simply prefer *wednós, *wedéni, because of the complete
>> >> parallel with Vedic udnás, udén(i).
>> >This will be reading an alternation into the graphics of a
>> >do no show that. What is the basis of the assumption that the
>> >cluster of /wedn-/ would be written with -te- and -ti-?
>> Standard Hittite orthographic practice. The cluster is
>> written using signs that echo the preceding vowel (/linkta/
>> = li-ni-kta, /walhzi/ = wa-al-ah-zi). How else could
>> /wednas/ be written?
>It would be normal for it to be written *ú-(e-)id-na-(a-)as. It
>would be most unusual if an intervocalic two-consonant cluster was
>written in a way that could indicate a vowel between the consonants.
>That appears to be avoided as a general rule.
>Therefore the fiveThere is another plene spelling, given by Melchert as
>spellings ú-wi5-te-na-as, ú-e-te-na, ú-e-ti-na-an-za, ú-i-te-ni-it,
>ú-i-te-na-as given by Rieken for case forms other than the loc.sg.
>can hardly have /dn/, but would seem to demand /-den-/ just like the
>loc.sg. ú-i-te-e-ni, ú-e-te-ni.