Re: [tied] Re: Fun with prenasalized stops

On Mon, 05 Feb 2007 15:29:55 -0000, "tgpedersen"
<tgpedersen@...> wrote:

>> >According to Thurneysson, the OI neuter NA dual nasalizes, which
>> >sets it apart from the NA singular, which doesn't, so that can't be
>> >true. Either Thurneysson or you is right.
>>
>> I speak for Thurneysen.
>>
>> Thurneysen 285 [o-stem singualr] (p. 180):
>> "Nom. voc. acc. neut., with neutral final, nasalizing"
>> ibid. 287 [o-stem dual] (p. 182):
>> "Nom. acc. Neutral final, leniting when masculine"
>> "The neuter has the same form, but causes nasalization".
>>
>> The rest of the paragraph explains the course of events: the
>> original o-stem n. NA dual *-oih1 should have given OIr.
>> palatalization and no nasalization (as does indeed the
>> a:-stem NA dual of identical shape).
>
>Thurneysen bases that ending (*-oi) on Skt. and Greek, which is wrong,

No, he bases it on on Skt. and Slavic, which is absolutely
correct.

>Skt. has one dubious example of it (see Burrow quote).

The Skt. o-stem NA n. du. is always -e: (< *-oih1). You are
confusing the o-stem NA n. du. -e: with the PIE C-stem NA
du. *-e, which may be attested in the Skt. dvandva compound
ma:tara-pitara:.

>He must mean Greek and Lithuanian.

Nope. Greek has replaced the neuter ending with the
masculine ending (-o:). Lithuanian has no neuter.


=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
miguelc@...