Re: [tied] 1sg. -o: [was Re: IE Thematic Vowel Rule]

Miguel:

> But it isn't. What is -iH?
> One solution is simpler than two.

Not if the solution is farfetched. Your *-i-h is
a composite of thematic *-i- (which exists on its
own) and dual *-h, of course. It probably developed
from analogy from the stem *dwi- "two" plus dual
*-h.

>> That way we can hook it up to Proto-Steppe *-uk and
>> thereby appease Jens' need to connect it with EA
>> and Uralic plural suffixes in *-k.
>
> You mean "dual".

Yes, sorry. And actually, that should be *-ak because
of the Altaic reflexes.

> We know that the accusative and genitive were
> originally [i.e. in Nostratic] not distinguished
> in the plural and dual: Semitic A/G pl. -a:ti vs.
> N -a:tu, Uralic A/G. pl. -j vs. N. -t).

And we should also know that Proto-Steppe has no
paradigmatic dual. Only that dual suffix, used for
natural pairs like *pat?-ak '(two) feet'.


Miguel:

> In IE, the distinction was reintroduced by different
> means:
> in the plural, the athematic acc.pl. *-abhi > *-Vm

I can't accept that. IE *-bHi- is a very late addition
to the case system from the particle *bHi. That's
self-evident.

> In the dual, the genitive must also have been
> identical to the accusative (which also merged
> with the nominative)

I don't reconstruct a dual outside of the Late IE
Period and refuse to. There's no evidence for it.
The IE developed the dual at a very late stage.

> N -o-h3 Skt. -a:u
> A -o-h1 Skt. -a:

This is ridiculous, of course. No one reconstructs
*-h3 and there's no reason to based on any firm
evidence. There are simpler solutions that are
already being used.


= gLeN




__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail
Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour:
http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html