Miguel makes a deceptive list of roots:
>>Words like *wedo:r "waters" (< *wed�r-xe), *nepo:t (< *nep�t:e)
>>or *k^wo:n (< *kew�ne)? Is that it? Examples?
>
>*dh�gho:m, *h2�kmo:n, *h2�gto:r, *h2�bo:l, *h2�uso:s, *n�po:ts,
>*w�k^onts, etc., etc.
Thank you for clarifying. First off, it would be irrational to
assume that all of IE vocabulary is of great antiquity. Some
words go back to the Old IE stage, others simply do not. No
big revelation.
What you fail to understand, Miguel, is that you can't glimpse
into past stages of IE if you keep obsessing over roots that
are obviously DERIVATIONAL and hence more RECENT. Your list above
is riddled with derivational roots that only serve to confuse the
issue. Let's take a lookey...
**xabo:l
--------
We must automatically throw away **xabo:l. Simply put: IE **b is
not justified. The root is either nonexistant or misconstructed.
*nepo:t
-------
This is one of the few, ancient, nonderivational word forms
in your list (< Mid IE *nepat:e), originally an IndoTyrrhenian
compound term meaning "father's child" (cf. Tyrrhenian *nefotta).
nom./loc./dat./voc. *nep�t:e > *nepo:t (*nepot-s)
accusative *nep�t:e-m > *nepotm
genitive *nepet:�-se > *neptos
Everything is regular aside from the fact that the accusative
and weak cases have sided with the nominative in *-t, instead
of adopting a strange *-t/*-d- alternation in the paradigm.
Regardless of the abnormal phonetic developments, this paradigm
shows perfectly the archaic penultimate accent.
dh�gho:m
--------
This word form and words of its ilk are not very old. It is an
animatized inanimate such that *dh�gho:m < *dh�ghom-s < *dhegh�m.
The ending *-�m is the ol' genitive plural, of course, functioning
as a derivational suffix. It is attached to a root *dhegh-. If the
word itself is derived from an older MIE form, that form could only
be *deg�ne and would be declined in the same way as *nep�te above.
Lesson 1: Words with *-o:m are recent animatized inanimates in
*-�m (genitive plural).
*x�k^mo:n
---------
The length of the last syllable is caused by compensatory
lengthening and immediately derives from earlier *x�k^mon-s.
Again, like *dhegho:m, the form is not ancient, and is an
animatized version of *x�k^mn. The origin of the word is
clear, having been derived from *xak^- "to cut".
Lesson 2: Words with *-mo:n are animatized inanimates in *-mn.
(Are you seeing a pattern in Early Late IE morphology
yet?)
*x�uso:s
--------
The "dawn" word is certainly derivational, from *xeus- "to shine"
with a strange *-o:s ending that, if I recall, has been claimed
to be a special "divinatory" suffix. Whatever. Time for some
reality.
In actuality, the word is (dare I say yet again) an animatized
version of an originally inanimate noun *xausos, meaning the
same thing. In turn, the accent was previously on the last
syllable (*xeus�s) and thus identical to the adjectival form
which had avoided acrostatic regularisation.
If the word has a long past, the MIE form should be something a
little different: *xeusase.
Lesson 3: Beware of the recently formed *-o:s ending.
*x�g^to:r
---------
Aaarghh... Again, derivational. From *xagtr, for the same reasons
that I've mentioned before: an animatized inanimate.
*w�k^onts
---------
A derivational root with a recently devised accentuation. Need I
mention the inanimate form that probably underlies this word
(*w�k^nt).
In the future, Miguel, please pick NON-derivational root forms so
that we can discuss this seriously.
- love gLeN
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp