Re: [tied] The centum-word

On Tue, 03 Apr 2001 07:51:40 , "Glen Gordon"
<glengordon01@...> wrote:

>Now, in the case of collective suffixes or any other more secondary
>suffixing outside of the declensional paradigm, the *n was NOT retained. For
>the collective of *wat:n, we are simply adding an optional suffix *-xe
>(later *-x or that devilish lengthening) to the bare nomino-accusative stem.
>Due to the strict penultimate accent of that time prior to vowel loss, we
>may only reconstruct *wet:án-xe with accent on the _second_ syllable. (Also
>note the *a/*e rule: When the accent is off of a stem with accented *-a-, it
>becomes *-e- (schwa))
>
>When *wat:n became *wat:r, the collective form followed suit as *wet:ár-xe.
>The reason is that the collective suffix, while used occasionally, was never
>a systematic and regular part of the declension.

This makes no sense: either your *-xe was _not_ univerbated, and thus
didn't stop the auslaut law *-n > *-r nor made the stress shift; or it
_was_ univerbated, caused the stress to shift and prevented *-n > *-r.
You can't have a convenient combination of these.

=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...