Re: Spirantized puzzle

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "stlatos" <stlatos@...> wrote:

>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@> wrote:
>
> > This is strange:
> >
> > Skt. Nsg pitá, Ds pitré (< *pitréi)
> >
> > Av. Nsg ptá:, Ds fðrái (< *pitréi)
>
> It's a result of the r:
>
> px,tr-
> pxtr-
> ptr-
> ptHr-
> pTr-
> fTr-
> fðr-
>
> x() > -syl. /
> x > 0 /
> stop-voice > +aspir / _C+sonor/G
> stop+aspir > +contin.
> stop > +contin / _obs.+contin.
> obs.+contin. > +voice / obs.+contin._
>
> The last rule is part of the shift of xT > Gð, etc., seen in
> intermediate stages in Av. (*wekWto- 'spoken' > uxða-).

You didn't get it. The puzzle was why Skt. looks like a generalization
from Avestan Nsg, and PGerm like a generalization from Avestan Dsg.
I'm arguing that PIE paradigms alternated like Avestan and that
various daughter language arrived at their paradigms by various
generalizations of those paradigm. If that is so, Grimm and Verner was
something that happened inside PIE, not in PGerm.


Torsten