Re: [tied] Bader's article on *-os(y)o

From: enlil@...
Message: 33202
Date: 2004-06-11

Jens to Rob:
> The presence of a vowel in the 3sg ought to have influenced the accent,
> which is not the case. And the process whereby "3sg *-t came from *-to"
> needs spelling out.

This is just from someone who can't listen. It's already been spelled
out countless times. The exclusive use of *so as an animate while *to-
is used in the animate weak cases & plural is secure evidence for all
thinking people that *to- was once used for _all_ genders and that
*so, being never declined anyways for case, was simply an undeclinable
particle seperate from the *to- paradigm, indicating general animate
definiteness like English "the". So this explains why *-t is used
for any gender in the 3ps and should be a wake-up call for any serious
linguist trying to figure out where the 3ps marker came from. This also
explains the origin of the nominative from *-sa as well, all in one
blow, a suffix which is affected by the same process as *-ta in the next
paragraph.

The manner in which *-ta (from *ta > *to-) becomes *-t is the very same
Syncope that obliterates all other instances of unstressed *a in ALL
eLIE words. This Syncope is proven by the remnant quantitative ablaut
alternations (*e/NULL). So if such a general that Jens and I agree on
explains the loss here, there's nothing to spell out because the student
is too challenged to be attending gLeN's school of linguistic hard knox.

This is simple to understand, realistic and therefore practically
undebatable as a solution. Jens "accent retractions" are erroneous
and cause him to draw very unlikely conclusions about preIE.


Rob:
> Right. This means that the root form had already been established as
> *xak before the suffix (presumably *-man) was added. However, why
> didn't the accent shift due to the syllabic suffix?

Please be attentive to chronology. If you aren't, any rule will fail
out of its misuse.


> No, how could it be? It's the prestage which changed into *H2e'k^-mon-z

Look, its easy to work this back but you gotta keep level about this:

*xakmon-
< *xakmans (Vowel Shift)
< *xakm&.ns (Schwa Merger)
< *xakm&ns (Schwa Diffusion)

That may be as far as we can go. Before that, there is Thematicization
which had formed the animate suffix *-m&n- from inanimate *-mn, so
as a word, it may not have been coined yet. This brings us as far
as about mid Late IE. You're using a recent word to derive ancient
rules. That's senseless. Again, the chronology is all wrong which
is why you're all running into problems and false conclusions.


= gLeN