Res: [tied] Re: Latin Honor < ?

From: Torsten
Message: 65965
Date: 2010-03-13

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...> wrote:
>
> On 2010-03-13 00:47, Joao S. Lopes wrote:
> >
> >
> > Probably by analogy to -us of Nominative.
> >
> > *wenos gen *wenesos, adj. *wenestos, *wenesnos cf. greek erebos,
> > erebeinos (<*h1regWes-no)
>
> As a matter of fact, Jens Rasmussen speculates that *-esto- itself
> is analogical as well, and that the original adjectival derivatives
> of es-stem nouns ended in *-eto- (parallelling *s ~ *t alternations
> found elsewhere). Cf. Skt. namas- 'homage' vs. Gaul. nemeton 'holy
> place' (*nem-es-, adj. nem-et-o-). If so, an older PIE *wenh1-et-o-
> was replaced by "dialectal" *wenh1-es-to- (because of *wenh1-es-),
> and of course in the immediate ancestor of Latin *wenesto- was
> influenced by the vocalism of *wenos, yielding *wenosto-.

Wouldn't you get the same by assuming that s-stems were regularly built on other stems, thus *neme-to and *nemes-to? What exactly is the status of s-stems anyway, are they seen as derived or fundamental?


Torsten