Miguel:
>As you know, I have reconstructed the dual endings as *-mW-h2-�s
> > *-w�s, *-t(W)-h2-�s > *-th�s, *-(h2)-t-�s > *-t�s.
Okay, first before we speak of the dual, we have to agree on what
the dual endings looked like. Aren't the dual pronominal endings
for the first, second and third persons considered to be: *-wes, *-thos
(*-txos) and *-tes? Where did that *h2 come from??
Jens:
>So *(h)ok^to:(w) was made in a hurry in non-Anatolian Indo-European
>before the split-off of the next branch, say Tocharian?
I guess I'm going to have to type more slowly for some of yous...
Let's try this again.
First, what I _actually_ said was that IE *okto:u was misanalysed **by
its own speakers** to be a dual simply because it ended in the same
way as *dwo:u. This misanalysis occured sometime in Late IE. So
obviously Common IE had some sort of dual, although not fully
developped, by the time Anatolian split away. My position is simply
that the dual is not ancient (ie: that it is any more than a thousand
years old).
Second, whether Kartvelian *otxo- is a borrowing from IE or not
has absolutely no bearing on whether IE's dual was fully worked out
or not.
Third, there's nothing that says *otxo- is a loanword from IE *okto:u.
It could just as well be a native word and afaik there is no instance
of a stem **okto- which would be necessary to validate your as-of-yet
empty belief.
Jens:
>Read my text, you're not replying to the point. You are actually making it
>worse: How could such a very young dual inflection take such a silly turn?
If Armenian can take silly turns, IE can too. Plus, calling it a "silly
turn" is a
subjective assessment.
>Why was a newly-formed number category inflected with endings that are
>so different from those of the other numbers?
This is an illogical question. What endings are "so different" from the
other
numbers? The pronominal endings for example are transparently built on
other pre-existing pronominal endings.
>Why are the dual forms the *least* transparent set we have?
A subjective arguement dependent on a matter of perspective.
If we choose to be blind, then we're blind.
>And why do the dual endings look so similar to dual forms outside
>Indo-European?
Again, more illogical arguements. This supposed "similarity" must be
further proven. Your viewpoint is by no means generally agreed
upon. I shouldn't have to logically account for someone else's
"huntches".
= gLeN
_________________________________________________________________
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963