Re: [tied] Re: Mi- and hi-conjugation in Germanic

From: Miguel Carrasquer
Message: 36757
Date: 2005-03-15

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 14:28:47 +0000, elmeras2000
<jer@...> wrote:

>--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:
>> On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 23:20:16 +0000, elmeras2000
>> <jer@...> wrote:

>> >I don't think I know of any examples of apparent lengthening
>before
>> >media + sonant other than vêdró and vy"dra. For vêdró independent
>> >length is a very obvious possibility. For vy"dra I only notice
>that
>> >the feminine (or generic) form of an animal name is combined with
>> >vrddhi in Lith. várna (1) and Germanic Huhn. I would therefore
>> >assume that the most likely explanation of its length is that the
>> >vowel was long already before any working of Winter's law. If
>Lith.
>> >ú:dras (3) and Latv. ûdrs have taken over the long vowel from
>ú:dra
>> >(1), then vy"dra does not need to have ever changed the position
>of
>> >its accent. The BSl. forms would be masc. *u:drá-s, fem. *ú:dra:,
>> >levelled from *udrá-s, *ú:dra:; if one distinguishes the genders
>it
>> >is precisely masc. udrá-, fem. húdra: that is quotable from
>Sanskrit
>> >and Greek (whose masc. húdros is then due to levelling).
>>
>> Is it really necessary to set up a whole zoo of analogies,
>
>Come, come, temper.

Actually, since the whole thing was about otters, ottresses,
watersnakes and chickens, I thought the term "zoo" would be
appropriate and fun.

>There is no excessive amount of analogy in
>ú:dra : ûdrs, and there must be some in húdros : udrá-s anyway.

Almost all the forms in your analysis would be analogical /
levelled. The Greek accent is not necessarily analogical
(in fact, I think it isn't: I would assume the accent was
retracted in both *udrós and *udrá: for some reason I don't
know about).

>> when there's a simpler solution: Winter's lengthening works
>> in both vy"dra and vêdró? What's so terrible anyway about
>> Winter's law working before -dr-? Note that the phonetics
>> of -dr- are very different from the phonetics of -dn- (where
>> Winter's law indeed didn't work).
>
>You mean specifically before /dr/? Well, everything should be
>considered. Or do you mean specifically before /br/, /dg/, /gr/?

Yes.

>> In your 1992 article, you present the counterexamples Lith.
>> gie~dras (gaidrùs), Latv. idrs, OCS dUbrU and pigùs (~
>> *pigrós).
>
>>The Latvian word I find unclear (and Grk. oi~dos
>> is barytone).
>
>Do you now? The accent of the Greek s-stem has no bearing on the
>matter. Trautmann BSl.Wb cites idrs as meaning 'mürbe', and idra as
>denoting 'faules Mark eines Baumes'. The IE type is plainly that of
>Ved. ug-rá-, cit-rá-. r.j-rá-, Gk. eruth-ró-s with zero-grade root
>before the accented suffix. The cognates denote swelling and tumors
>implying unpleasant decay of the body. It looks like a fine
>etymology, one we would use if we were sure about the sound rules.
>Now, to set the rules, it has to be subjected to the most critical
>inspection there is, and of course it can be wrong. Thus, it
>invites, but does not strictly prove the inference that -dr- blocked
>Winter's lengthening.
>
>> The OCS word doesn't exist (it's dUbrI, Old
>> Russ. dIbrI, which may have a different etymology, or have
>> its vocalism after *dUbnó).
>
>Right, the wrong jer got drawn here at some point; I'm sure that's
>gonna happen again. The idea I'm reporting is that dUbrI is a
>substantival variant of *dUbrU (which I'd better make sure gets its
>asterisk), which would be a perfectly well-formed IE adjective *dhub-
>ró- 'deep', identical with Toch.B tapre 'high'.

As I said in my other message, Slav. dUbrI/dIbrI is best
connected with Lith. dubury~s.

>Now, again, there is
>Latvian dubra 'Pfütze, morastige Stelle'. That could of course all
>reflect initial accent on contrasting substantives, but then what is
>the remaining *dub-ú-? Is there much point in departing from radical
>accent in adjectival u-stems? That type quite certainly had suffixal
>accent in IE.
>
>> That leaves gie~dras/gaidrùs
>> and *pigros, of which the first can easily have acquired
>> *-dh- from the word of identical meaning reflected in Slavic
>> as védro (Russ. vëdro) [a remarkable a.p. a word, by the
>> way], and in English as "weather".
>
>Please tell us how easily this goes.

If you have *wedhros and *gaidros, both meaning "clear
weather", some mutual influencing is easily imaginable. Of
course it's just a just-so story.

>> And pigùs may not be a
>> replacement of *pigros after all, but simply a barytone
>> u-stem, secondarily mobilized, like su:nùs.
>
>Sure, there is no evidence for the existence of a direct reflex of
>*pig-ro- in Balto-Slavic. I never said there was. But zero-grade u-
>stem adjectives were not barytone in IE.
>
>> I've looked if there were any other non-lengthenings in
>> Slavic. I found only bedrò and jeNdrò. In the case of
>> jeNdrò lengthening may simply be there as it is in vêdrò, we
>> just don't see it. The word bedrò (also bedrà, after the
>> plural), pl. R. bëdra "thigh" is used mainly in the plural,
>> where Winter's lengtening is blocked by the accent
>> (*bhédrah2). A singular *bêdro could hardly not have adopted
>> the vocalism of the plural.
>
>Sounds fine. But does the -d- have to be unaspirated?

Shoot, I saw *bod- and took it for PIE instead of PBS. The
*b- should have made me suspicious.

In any case, given such clear cases as vydra and vêdro, I
can't accept that Winter's law did not work before *-dr-
(*-gr-, etc.). The counterevidence carries considerably
less weight for me than vydra and vêdro, some parts of it
are problematical, and the best parts of it really say
nothing about *-dr- per se, but instead seem to indicate
that Winter's law did not occur before *-ús (which would be
bizarre, but if that's what the evidence shows, it's what it
shows).


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