--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...> wrote:
>
> On 2007-03-20 00:39, Piotr Gasiorowski wrote:
>
> > On 2007-03-20 00:11, alexandru_mg3 wrote:
> >
> >> Sorry: b) Lith. nósis < *hneh2-s-.
> >
> > Or an i-stem based on *ná:s-im < *(H)ná:s-m., with the same
accentual
> > outcome.
>
> Before you ask what long *a: is doing in the accusative -- if the
ablaut
> was *a:/*a, the strong cases INCLUDING the acc.sg. had *a:, while
the
> weak cases had *a. This is what one sees in Sanskrit: nom.du.
ná:sa:,
> gen.du. nasós., loc.sg. nasi. Sorry if I didn't make myself
sufficiently
> clear about that.
>
> Piotr
>
Piotr, it's you not me that have problems here with this a:/a that
doesn't lead to anything:
Please try to clarify the things before to postulate this strong-
a:/weak-a pattern:
What was the Pie Root here, in you opinion, if no laryngeal was
inside?
a) *Hnas is impossible (not due to a, that I put away) but because
the zero grade Hn.s will give PIIr. *Has, etc...
b) ...and I hope you will not propose *Hna:s ...as the basic root
because this is a lengthened-grade not a root
c) also you cannot propose an s-stem (see *Hneh2-s of Lubotsky))
without to suppose a laryngeal...because a root Hna(:)- is a non-
sense too....
So what you are talking about here?
Please, define the root first, before to talk about different grades
Marius