Re: [tied] Slavic *sUto -> is NOT INHERIT

--- alexandru_mg3 <alexandru_mg3@...> wrote:

> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Sean Whalen
> <stlatos@...> wrote:
>
> > Since final *um becomes U and not a nasal
> > vowel m must either disappear or go through
> > an intermediate non-N stage.
> >
>
> But the word is sUTo with a final vowel -o, not with
> a final -um(t)

It's already been theorized (and I agree)
that the -od of pronouns spread to neuter
nouns in Slavic. The change of *-om > U
is seen in other words where an analogy
didn't occur.

> Could you explain what is contextual different in
> suTo in relation with
> the 3 below examples where we have the expected eN:
>
> see OCS deseNtU 'tenth' < PBS. *des'imtos < PIE
> *dek^m.-t-o-
>
> see OCS tysoNšti, tyseNšti `thousand' < PIE
> *tuHs-ont-; *tuHs-ent-
>
> see OCS žeNti `press, squeeze' < PIE *g(e)m-t-
> (Latvian gumt 'seize')

As I've said, the other words with
*im-t have other forms which allow analogy
(such as um back to im) before um>uw. I
don't know the exact order of all rules
(variation is possible) so I can't say
exactly when or what, but I already
gave one possible example. Another
possibility is that im-t > uw-t before
back V only. This would still require
analogy, just at a different time and
of a different type than in
my earlier possible example.




____________________________________________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
http://new.mail.yahoo.com