Re: [tied] Re: Day and dies, deus and theos

From: Piotr Gasiorowski
Message: 5854
Date: 2001-01-29

Sorry for the confusing wording. I didn't mean Slavic *U --> *u (there is no such process) but the innovated full grade (*dHeus-/*dHous-) that arose already in dialectal IE, based on *dHus- (the samprasa:ran.a nil grade of *dHwes-). I wrote "new" meaning "secondary", not "recent".
 
The Slavic lengthened (rather than full) grade *U (< *u) --> *y (< *u:) can be seen in *dyxati/*dys^ati 'breathe/pant' (iterative, imperfective) -- but I needn't tell you that.
 
I wrote *dus^ja with a didactic intention -- to make it clear that it's historically a *-ja- noun. Of course the historical development was (*dHous- + ja: >) *dauxja: > *dus^(j)a. The glide must have been absorbed by the palatalised consonant by the time the individual Slavic languages emerged, and if there was any original phonetic difference between reflexes of *-xj- and *-sj-, it had been lost by then. I agree that *dus^a is the preferable transcription for late common Slavic.
 
Piotr
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From: S.Tarasovas@...
To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 1:57 PM
Subject: [tied] Re: Day and dies, deus and theos

--- In cybalist@......, "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@......> wrote:
>*dUx-U 'breath', and with a new full grade in *duxU 'spirit, ghost',
>*dus^ja 'soul'.
>
> Piotr

I've heard of Slavic new full grade like *U>*y, but *U>*u is
something new for me. Did you mean PRE-Slavic processes? Again, what
do you mean by -s^j- in *dus^ja? -j- is superfluous, there were no
unpalatalized s^ in Proto-Slavic. Or maybe you treat *s^<*sj and
*s^<*x{e,i,Ir,e,} as s1 'more palatalized, thus designated as s^j'
and s2 as 'less palatalized, thus designated as s^'?

Sergei