From: Piotr Gasiorowski
Message: 21164
Date: 2003-04-21
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jens Elmegaard Rasmussen" <jer@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, April 21, 2003 7:49 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] IE genitive
> No, there seem to be no i-variants of the stem *te-/to-. The enclitic appears to be *i-. Perhaps this is really so, the lacking **ti- appearing as *(H1)i-, much as Eng. <that> is <it> when enclitic. But that need additional work.
> Some basic items are: *im, *id are frequently enclitic (Eng. <it> still is), as are their sandhi friends OP dim, OPr. din, Av. s^im, him, Gk. mim, min, which are all just *im in liaison with some preceding word-end ...
Just a minor point. Eng. <it> originated as a weak form of OE hit < *k^id- (cf. Dutch <het>, Goth. <hita>), and is not a straight-line descendant of *id. The latter is continued by Ger. <es> (Goth. <ita>, etc.).
Piotr