[tied] Re: Got to thinkin' about word order

Actually, the theory is not mine either. I have only read it in some
book of which I do not remember the title any more. Before I read the
theory, I was thinking the same thing about the ablatives that you
do, and maybe I then have to rethink once more.

However, I thought the theory was fine because it fitted with all
those other t/s-connections.

There is however one thing I do not understand. Why is not
àta>àsa>às>òs possible. Is it simply because it is not observed that
t becomes s after a stressed wovel in other circumstanses?

However, the assumption that an ablative becomes a genitive is
actually a strenght of the theory. It is simply a generic fact that
ablativic elements tend to develope either into a genitive or a
partitive. It has happaned in nearly all languages I know something
about.

As for the -s-element in the finnish inessive, as far as I know it is
a derivational ending that still exists and is nowadays used as a
diminuative. (The ending has to shapes -se, and a redused shape -s).

kala-fish, kala-nen,kala-se-, kala-s- little fish (In the nom.sg the
ending -nen is used instead of the -s(e)-ending)

The -la- element is a derivational ending that donote place where
something exist, and is also still in use. sairaa- sick, sairaa-la -
hospital.