On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 13:47:01 +0200, Miguel Carrasquer <
mcv@...> wrote:
>Only thing that occurs to me is *-h1en- c.q. *-h3on-, cf. Adams "Tocharian"
>chapter V, "The Noun", where it is suggested that part of the Tocharian
>n-stems contain that suffix. I'll read it through more carefully before I
>say anything more.
The Tocharian data is rather messy. In any case, an o-stem base extended
with *-Hon is a possibility for the masc. n-stem nom. sg. (*-o-Ho:n -> OE
-a-e > -a, OS/OHG -a-a > -o), but we run into problems if we want to keep
the *-Hon- (*-Hen-, *-Hn-) in the acc. and obl. cases [on the other hand,
the fem. acc. and obl. with e.g. their Gothic unitary -o:- might fit such
forms well enough].
=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...