I was trying to put together my own reconstruction of the Proto-Germanic
nominal declensions, but since my main source of information on Germanic
specifically is Loewe's "Germanische Sprachwissenschaft", zweite Auflage,
1911 (!), I though it would perhaps be better to get some additional
help...
o-stems:
PIE PGmc
Nom. *-os *-az
Runic -az, Goth. -s, ON -r, WGmc -0. No problems.
Acc. *-om *-aN
n. *-om *-aN
Runic -a, ENWGmc. -0. P. Ramat suggests that the famous inscription "ek
hlewagastiz holtijaz horna tawido" is perhaps better translated as "I
Hlewagastiz [son] of Holt made [these] two horns", but I don't know if that
is meant as a suggestion that *-aN had perhaps already been reduced to -0
in Runic, or as a suggestion that perhaps the dual was still alive in
Germanic at that early stage. In any case, he reconstructs PGmc. *-aN.
Voc. *-e *-i > -0
Gothic -0, elsewhere merged with or replaced by the nom.
Gen. *-osyo *-asa
Runic -as, OE (West-Saxon) -æs > -es, OS -as. Gothic -is comes from the
pronominal ending *-esyo > *-esa. Loewe suggests that OS -es and OHG -es
cannot come directly from *-esa, which would have given *-is (*e > *i when
unstressed), and represent contamination between -as and -is, but I very
much doubt that. I think *e before *a simply gives /e/, even in unstressed
position. Any more recent suggestions?
Dat. *-o:i *-ai
Loc. *-oi *-ai
North and West Germanic -e could come from either Dat. or Loc. Gothic -a
cannot come from either (we'd expect -ai), so it's a instrumental.
Ins. *-o: *-o
Gothic -a (dat.), OS/OHG -u. OE -e is a dative/locative.
Abl. *-o:t *-o:
Not preserved as a case form, but found in adverbs (Goth -o:, ON -a, OE -a,
OS -o, OHG -o)
pl.
The nominative in *-oi is unattested in Germanic. PIE *-o:s would have
given PGmc. *-o:z, which explains Goth -o:s and ON -ar, but not OE -as, OS
-os. The reconstruction is thus:
PIE *-ó:ses *-o:siz
*'-o:ses *-o:ziz
which explains all the forms (Goth. -o:ss > -o:s, ON *-o:ziz > -arr > -ar,
OE/OS *-o:siz > *-as). OHG -a is the acc. form.
Acc. *-ons *-anz
The PIE form can be *-ons or *-o:ns. Germanic *-anz (Goth -ans, N/W -a)
must be from *-ons.
n.pl. PIE *-&2 > *-a or *-eh2 > *-a:. Germanic continues the second form
(Goth -a, OE/OS -u ~ -0, ON/OHG -0).
Gen. *-o:m *-o:N
Not problematical in N/W Gmc. (ON -a, OE -a, OS -o, OHG -o), where the
ending has spread to all declensions. For my latest thoughts on Gothic
-e:, see the i-stems.
The Dat/Abl. was PIE *-oios, *-oibhios or *-obhios, Ins. *-o:is. In
pre-Germanic, the Ins. was probably regularized to *-obhis > *-amiz and
merged with *-obhios > *-amjaz to *-amiz (Goth. -am). ON and OE have -om
and -um respectively as they have in all declensions, OS and OHG have -um.
I'm not sure about ON -om, but -um seems derivable from n-stem -n.-bhi(o)s
and u-stem -u-bhi(o)s, replacing o-stem *-am(iz).
The Loc.pl. in *-su has not left any traces in the Germanic declensions.
In summary:
N *-az *-o:siz, *-o:ziz
A *-aN *-anz
n *-aN *-o
V *-i
G *-asa, *-esa *-o:N
D *-ai *-amiz
I *-o
(Ab. *-o:)
a:-stems
PGmc
Nom. *-eh2 > *-a: *-o
Gothic -a, ON -0 (*-u), OE -0 ~ -u. OS/OHG -a from the accusative.
Acc. *-eh2m > *-a:m -oN
OE -e (*-a), OS/OHG -a. Gothic and ON have the nominative form.
Voc. = Nom.
Gen. *-eh2os > *-a:s *-o:z
Goth. -o:s, ON -ar, OE -e (-ae), OS -a, OHG -a:
Dat/Loc *-eh2(e)i > *-a:i *-ai
Goth -ai, OE -e. The ON, OS and OHG forms are instrumentals.
Ins. *-eh2(e)h1(?) > *-a: *-o
ON -0 (*-u), OS -u, OHG -u (all datives).
Plural:
Nom. *-eh2es > *-a:s *-o:z
Goth. -o:s, ON -ar, OE -a, OS -a, OHG -a:. Only OE has a form slightly
different from the Gsg. Explanation?
Acc. *-eh2ns > *-a:ns *-o:Nz
Merged everywhere in Germanic with the Nom.pl.
Gen. *-eh2om > *-a:m *-o:N
Goth. -o:, ON -a, OE -a, OS -o. The by-form *-eh2-n-o(:)m > *-a:no:m (Skt.
-a:na:m) is found in OE -ena, OS -ono, OHG -o:no.
Dat/Abl/Ins(/Loc) *-a:-bhi(o)z > *-o:miz
Goth. -o:m, OHG -o:m.
In summary:
N *-o *-o:z
A *-oN *-o:Nz
G *-o:z *-o:N, *-o:no:N
DL *-ai *-o:miz
I *-o
The Germanic *-ja and *-jo:-stems (*io- and *ia:-stems) need not be
distinguished from the o- and a:-stems at the PGmc. stage (unless some
cases of ja:-stem Nsg. *-i: are relicts from the *ih2-stems). Otherwise, I
guess they were declined regularly, with *-j- preceding the case-endings.
The i-stems:
Nom. *-is > *-iz
Goth. -s, ON -r, OE -e, -0, OS -0, -i, OHG -0, -i
Acc. *-im > *-iN
Goth. -0, ON -0, OE -0, -e, OS -0, -i, OHG -0, -i
Voc. *-ei or *-i > *-i(:)
Goth -0 from *-i. Elsewhere = Nom.
Gen. *-eis should have given Gmc. *-i:z. Instead we find Goth. -ais,
ON -s, OE -e, OS -i, OHG -i, of which only the OS and OHG forms can be
from *-i:z. Loewe suggests PIE *-ois (perhaps on the model of u-stem
-eus or -ous), which I don't find convincing. The WGmc forms are
indistinguishable from the dative/locative, so perhaps Gothic -ais is
simple dative *-ai + -s (with some help from u-stem G. -aus, D. -au).
Dat *-eiei
Loc *-e:i *-ai
The dative forms are old locatives (Goth. -ai, OE -e, OS/OHG -i).
Ins. *-ih1 *-i:
OS/OHG have added -u from the o-stems (> -iu). OE -e is dative/locative.
Plural:
Nom. *-eies *-i:z
Goth. -eis, ON -er, OE -e, OS -i, OHG -i.
Acc. *-ins *-iNz
Goth. -ins, ON -e, OE -e, OS -i, OHG -i (merged with nominative).
Gen. *-eiom *-eiaN
ON and OE have adopted the o-stem ending *-o:N (ON -a, OE -a).
OS -io, OHG -eo may come from *-jaN, but Gothic -e: may perhaps
be explained as *-e:2(aN), following van Coetsem's explanation of
PGmc *e:2 from PIE *ei with a-Umlaut.
It's a reasonably well-established fact that PIE *i/*e and *u gave
PGmc. *i and *u when a high vowel (*i or *u) followed in the next
syllable, whereas when *a followed they gave *e and *o. Applying
the same rules to the PGmc. "diphthongs" (as if they were still
biphonemic), we get:
*i/*u *a
*ai *ai *ae
*au *au *ao
*ei *ii *ee
*eu *iu *eo
If there ever was an Umlaut *au ~ *ao, *ai ~ *ae, no trace of it remains.
However, the a-Umlaut of *iu to *eo (OS, OHG eo, io) is well-established.
Van Coetsem's claim is that *ei likewise occurred in two variants *ii (>
*i:) before high vowel, *ee (> *e:2) before *a.
In the G.pl., PIE *-eiom would have developed to *-eeaN with *e:2. In
stressed position, we know that *e:2 gives -e: in Gothic, ON, OE and OS,
/ia/ in OHG (and <ie> in modern Dutch). Can the Gpl. endings OS -io and
OHG -eo go back to *-e:2a(N)? Gothic -e: surely can.
D/Ab/I/L pl. *-i-bhi(o)s > *-imiz
Goth., OHG -im.
The masculine i-stems have a partially different paradigm, with o-stem
forms in the Gen. and Dat. singular. Loewe remarks that only in Gothic, in
the Gpl., the feminine i-stems have adopted an o-stem ending. In the light
of the above analysis, that should be the other way around: it's the
masculine o-stems that have adopted an i-stem ending.
In summary:
N *-iz *-i:z
A *-iN *-iNz
n *-i [*-(i)yo]
V *-i
G *-aiz (??) *-eiaN
DL *-ai *-imiz
I *-i
The u-stems:
Nom. *-uz *-uz
Goth -us, ON -r, OE -u, -0, OS -u, -0, OHG -u, -0
Acc. *-um *-uN
Goth. -u, ON -0, OE -u, -0, OS -u, -0, OHG -u, -0
Voc. *-eu *-au
*-u *-u
Both forms are found in Gothic -au, -u.
Gen. *-ous *-aus
Gothic -aus, ON -ar, OE -a, OS -o, OHG -o:.
Loc. *-e:u *-eu
*-o:u *-au
Gothic -au, Runic -iu > ON -i, -e, OHG -iu from *-eu.
OE -a, OS -o (and possibly Goth. -au) from *-au
Plural:
Nom. *-eues *-iwiz (*-iwz)
*-oues *-awiz
Goth. -jus (*-iwz), ON -iR, -er, OS/OHG -i.
OE. -a from *-awiz, besides OE -u from the Acc.
Acc. *-uns *-uNz
Goth. -uns, ON -o, OE -u, OHG -u. OE -a, OS -i, OHG -i
are nominative forms.
Gen. *-euo(:)m > *-ewo:N
Goth. *-iwo: > -iwe:. ON and OE have the o-stem Gpl (ON -a,
OE -a), OS -io, OHG -eo look like i-stem Gpl.'s, but may perhaps
also derive from *-ewo:N.
DLIAb *-ubhi(o)s > *-umiz
Goth., -um.
In summary:
N *-uz *-iwiz, *-awiz
A *-uN *-uNz
n *-u
V *-au, *-u
G *-auz *-ewo:N
DL *-eu, *-au *-umiz
Before I go on with the C-stems, I'm almost sure Piotr posted something
about Germanic n-stems some time ago, but I can't find it...
=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...