Re: etruscan, Lydian and Greek inscriptions

--- In cybalist@egroups.com, s.tarasovas@... wrote:

> > I was just quoting Archimedes answer to the Roman soldier: Noli
> > disturbare circulos meos. There is one thing that has puzzled

about

> IE
> > acc *-m, though. Sanskrit -m is weak, Latin -m disappears in

poetry

> > according to metric rules, Greek says -m -> -n, and everywhere

else

> > it disappears. Slavic nasalizes. So perhaps -m was only a
> > nasalization of the previous vowel? Note the use of -m in present
> day
> > Portuguese.
> >
>
> Today's Lithuanian nasalized (and lost nasalization except for some
> dialects) as well in auslaut, but the normal clear [n] sounds in
> inlaut, in compounds such as s^ian~dien 'today'<*s^ian~

die~nan 'this

> (Acc.) day (Acc.). Unbounded words' sequence would give s^iA die~nA
> (with slightly prolongated denasalized A).
>
> Sergei

Which makes me wonder again if there is solid evidence of a *-m
(insted of nasalisation) in PIE?

Torsten