Re: [tied] question

On Mon, 21 Jul 2003, Miguel Carrasquer wrote:

>
> On the other hand, Jens' theory about the nom.pl. *-es is indeed
> connected
> to a disappearing /s/ (or rather, a */z/).  He can explain in more
> detail,
> but the gist of it is that */-es/ is derived from nom.sg. *-z + plural
> *-s,
> and subsequently **-zs > *-es.

I couldn't say it better myself.

Jens