[tied] Re: PNS

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...>
wrote:

>
> On 2006-09-20 09:31, tgpedersen wrote:
>
> >> *si.tjan > *sit.tjan (OSax. sittian) > OE sittan
> >
> > *seNdjan > *seHtjan > *siHtjan > *sittjan >
> > (by analogy with pret.) *sittan
>
> Do you mean that PIE *Nd became Gmc. *-Ht- and that this is
> what led to the WGmc. pre-j gemination of _all_ consonants
> (except *r) in _all_ parts of speech practically without
> exception? I'm afraid you have already let your new idée fixe
> carry you too far.

I think what happened is that when Germani entered Chatti territory,
people started syllabifying *sal.jan, *sal.dV. Later loss of -j-
for analogy reasons would lead to *sal.lan.

> >> *sa.ljan (cf. Goth. saljan, ON selja) > *sal.ljan > OE

sellan

> >> (the loss of *j was later than i/j-umlaut in pre-English,
> >> cf. OSax. sellian)
> > *saljan > *seljan > *sellan by analogy with pret.
>
> I beg your pardon? What analogy? The preterite stem is seald- <

*sal-d-.

See above.

> There is no gemination either in forms with vocalised *j, such as

2sg.

> selest and 3sg. seleþ (as opposed to 1sg. selle, pl. sellaþ, where

the

> *j remained consonantal). The whole beauty of the pattern consists

in

> the fact that it was _not_ affected by analogy and all the

expected

> alternations can still be seen in OE.
>

See above

> >> *li.Gjan > *lig.gjan > OE licg(e)an
> > *leghjan > *legjan > *ligjan >
> > (by analogy with pret.) > *liggan
>
> Same as above (pret. *laG/*læ:Gun > OE læg/læ:gon). Pleeeease! do

some

> reading before you write, especially if you intend to rewrite

Germanic

> historical phonology from scratch.
>

???

> Then, what about nouns like *kunja- > OE cynn, *aGjo: > OE ecg
> (OHG ecka, OSax. eggja, OFris. egg). The gemination is 100%
> regular and doesn't depend on the pattern of inflection.

cf. ON orr, arvar (vel sim.). -v and -j disapear in auslaut, and
therefore must fall later.


Torsten

>