[SPAM] [tied] Re: Latin /a/ after labials, IE *mori

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Brian M. Scott" <BMScott@...> wrote:

>
> At 7:10:59 PM on Sunday, May 31, 2009, alexandru_mg3 wrote:
>
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski
> > <gpiotr@> wrote:
>
> > 'To make sb. think' --> 'to instruct sb.' is a
>
> >> completely natural development.
>
> > 'To make sb. Think' ? --> this is the joke of this night
> > :)
>
> What would you expect a causative of *men- 'to think' to
> mean? Obviously 'to make (someone) think', of which 'to
> instruct (someone)' is, as Piotr said, a perfectly natural
> development.
>
> > Where you find it? can you quote sb. else that propose it?
>
> Watkins 2000, for one. Fortson, for two:
>
> The [Latin] second conjugation stem-vowel -e:- comes from
> the contraction of the causative suffix *-éye- (§5.32,
> e.g., mon-e:-re 'warn' < *mon-éye-, literally 'cause to
> think'), and ... .
>
> Michael Weiss, for three: he notes that one source of the
> Latin second conjugation is PIE o-grade causative/iteratives
> in *-éye- and gives <moneo:> 'warn' from *men- 'think' as an
> example. Palmer, for four: he specifically mentions <moneo:>
> as an example of a second conjugation verb from an original
> causative.
>
> Brian

Hello Brian,

I. If you have read the postings here, you could see, that nobody put in doubt the formation R(o)-'eye of this word.
But the discussion was "WHAT THE ROOT IS HERE" (knowing that we have 2: men- and mneh2-) in order to explain mo- > mo- in LATIN.

The main issue is that mo-n'e-ye doesn't explain the o- in Latin.

So everybody knows here, "what the general opinion is" but this general opinion didn't explain the o- in Latin.
If you have something to say on this aspect, of a course you are welcome....

II. I said: that to imagine an action 'X makes Y to think' for me is not Ok....a reflexive action ok, an iterative one ok, but I cannot imagine how could 'X could make Y to think' :) ...Do you?

In addition I have also a basic question for you:
Between:
men- 'to think' -> mone:re 'to warn'
Or
mneh2- 'to mention, to remember' -> mone:re 'to warn'

where we have a closer semantism?

Marius