Dear Sergejaus and List,
I believe I answered this some years ago. The root 'drink' is indeed
*peH3y- and alternates accordingly, e.g., 3sg aor. *poH3-t (Skt. á-pa:t),
caus. *poH3y-éye-ti (pa:yáyati) with retention of -y- before a vowel and
loss in the environment VH_C# (and VH_CC). To go with the root aorist
there was a reduplicated present, of which píbati etc. is properly the
refashioned subjunctive. The old injunctive would be 3sg *pi-péH3y-t >
*pi-póH3-t, 3pl *pé-pH3y-nt > *pé-pH3-n.t (the last form with y > zero in
CH_CC, processed before full syllabification of the sonant, as general
for these rules). The injunctive was now structured exactly like, say,
*dhi-dhéH1-t, 3pl *dhé-dhH1-n.t and then formed its subjunctive the same
way, which seems to have been *dhí-dhH1-e-t(i), cf. Skt. dádhati (with
analogical e-reduplication from dádha:ti, witness the general type
tís.t.hati, sí:dati etc. which must come from somewhere). For this verb,
the form would be *pí-pH3-e-t(i), whence PIE *píbeti. The easiest way out
is to consider the change pH3 > b older than laryngeal coloration, in
which case /-be-/ offers no problem.
The Greek aorist épion is of the type élipon, i.e. based on the
zero-grade with thematic inflection, in this case *pH3i-e/o-. The
structural basis of this stem type was no doubt the old 3sg middle of the
root-aorist, utilized as the stem of a thematic inflection which was
subsequently made active, i.e. 3sg mid. "*pH3i-é" -> 3sg act.
"*pH3i-é-t". However, with this specific verb, it is probably better to
depart from the 3pl root aor. *pH3i-ént assuming this structure to have
been transferred to the *wid-é-t/*wid-ó-nt model.
I have difficulties with OCS piti, which has an aorist 2/3sg pi. The
easy way out is perhaps simple levelling of the aorist paradigm *po:-t /
*pi(y)-ent to *pi:-t by generalization of the vowel timbre of the weak
forms. That would avoid a clash with Skt. ápa:t. The infinitive will then
be analogical as aor. by : inf. byti = aor. pi : inf. x, x = piti
(including the accent which is circumflex on by and pi, but acute on byti
and piti). The old full-grade aorist /po:-/ must underlie OPruss poieiti
2pl ipv. 'drink ye' and the inf. pou:ton, making the Slavic levelling a
post-Proto-BSl. event. Slavic went further and introduced /pi:-/ into the
present as well, 3sg pi-je-tU (acute on -i-, cf. Lith. stó-ju for the
type).
I don't know where that leaves /H3/ phonetically, except that it must
have been voiced and relatively weakly articulated after a stop when the
change occurred. For other reasons I am more inclined to think along the
lines of a spirant labiovelar g, but of course only where it was
preserved.
Jens
On Sat, 6 Jul 2002, sergejus_tarasovas wrote:
> In the _Elements of Indo-European Phonology_ published on the TITUS'
> website (http://titus.fkidg1.uni-frankfurt.de/didact/idg/idgphon.htm)
> *h3 is ascribed a phonetic value of [voiced faryngeal fricative], and
> it's stated there, that it therefore can trigger regressive
> assimilation, switching a preceding voiceless consonant to its voiced
> allophone. Thus, it's stated, that the cluster /ph3/ phonetically
> surfaces as [b`] in the same manner as /pd/ surfaced as [bd]; the
> examples provided include 3 pl. present of the drink-verb,
> reconstructed there as *piph3enti [pib`onti], allegedly continued in
> OInd. _pibanti_, Lat. _bibunt_, OIr. _ibat_ and *h2eph3o:n [hab`o:n]
> 'watery' (N.sg), continued in OIr. _aub_.
>
> That raises a lot of questions.
> 1. Is anybody on the list aware of other examples, both pro and
> contra?
> 2. If Piotr's treatment of the drink-verb
> (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/7986, also
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/7968) is correct,
> *piph3enti is an impossible form, the correct form being *pipiHenti
> (since 1. the root would be *peiH- rather that *peH- + *-i-; 2. the
> exact quality of the laryngeal is unknown, since -o- in forms like
> *po:- and *poi- is accounted for by the qualitative ablaut rather
> than the o-colouring laryngeal; 3. the word looks like an athematic
> intensive from athematic *peiH-/*poiH- formed by "i-grade
> reduplication").
> But then, I with my rather dilettanticly straightforward way of
> thinking can't see how *pipiHenti would account for, say, OInd.
> _pibanti_ and Lat. _bibunt_. Why _b_, indeed? Why Latin -unt- in case
> the laryngeal is not restricted to *h3?
> And, last not least, why *piHV- > *pV? One would expect *pijV- (if
> from *pi.HV-) or at least *pjV- (if from tautosyllabic *piHV-, this
> would assume the sonority of the laryngeal to be greater than that of
> *i [j].
>
> Sergei
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>