From: Andrew Jarrette
Message: 63840
Date: 2009-04-16
>And you mean that the *o: in the nominative singular arose from compensatory lengthening due to the loss of *t, which was later reintroduced on the analogy of <óps> etc.? Sounds good enough for me, but then what about *wo:kWs? Why does it have a long vowel?
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew Jarrette" <anjarrette@> wrote:
> >
> > Well, wouldn't one expect Greek *po:s in the nominative singular from IE *po:ts? Odoús has <ou> from *ons (< *onts), which became nasalized *õs which became a long vowel higher than Greek <o:> which was therefore written <ou> (hence <-ous>. At least that's what I've always assumed. Where would <ou> come from in <poús>? Normally *ts becomes <s> in Greek, does it not, without influencing a preceding vowel, long or short? Or am I wrong here? What is the 2nd sg. indic. pres. of *h1ed- in Greek? What other monosyllabic consonant stems end in *-ts < *-ds in PIE (and in Greek)?
> >
> > Andrew
> >
>
> You are right, Andrew - my odoús is an irrelavant example.
> I do not recall other cases of a final dental + s. I am not an expert in Greek, though. Anyway, methinks that the word in question sounded [pots] in some period of time, with a dental possibly restored after óps etc. What do you think of this?
>