Re: [tied] Bog

--- In cybalist@..., "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@...> wrote:

> Your pedantism does you credit :) Thanks for the correction,

Sergei.

> Of course Slavic *-at- may reflect either *-a:t- or *-o:t-. Looks

as

> if -a:-stems had originally formed adjectives in -a:t-as
> ("barzduotas" should read <barzdotas>), and -o-stems in *-o:t-as.
> This makes a lot of sense, cf. Latin cornu : cornu:tus and

Lithuanian

> akis 'eye' : akytas 'having eyes'. *-H-to-?
>
> Piotr

I was blind. Now I see the light of truth. All the relevant Lith.
adjectives I have travelled over seem to adhere to this rule. Slavic
echoes Lithuanian though in a strange way: *oko (-o- stem, but
probably from -i-stem?) -> *oc^itU(jI) 'having eyes' (like in OCS
mInogooc^itii xeruvimi 'many-eyed cherubim').

Sergei