Re: [tied] Animate Dual in -h3 (was: IE Roots)

From: Glen Gordon
Message: 25334
Date: 2003-08-26

Miguel is corrected by Jens:
>That looks like a mistake. [...] The obvious solution is gen. *-oHs vs.
>loc. *-oHu.

Um, even a more obvious solution would be *-o:s and
*-o:u without a laryngeal. And as I said before, final
*-o: at some point must have acquired the labial glide
to produce *-o:u. So, we merely have the genitive
in *-(o)s and the locative in *-u attached to a stem
that just happens to end in *-o:-.

However, as far as I know, the dual endings aren't
securely reconstructed passed the nominative,
accusative or vocative. Am I wrong?


Miguel:
>2) the o-stem instrumental sg. also ends in *-o: (*-o(:)h1),
>and there's no off-glide -u there.

Jens:
>That is not relevant precisely if the instr.sg. ended in a
>laryngeal and the nom.-acc.du. did not.

Exactly. The solution is *-o:-h and thus the u-glide is not
to be expected because *o: is not word-final.


Miguel:
>Why should *t have been interpreted as *txw? It isn't in *r.k^t�s "bear" >
>Kartv. *das^tw.

Now how can I talk to you seriously when you cite a non-
existent stem? Due to the Hittite cognate, the stem is
actually *xrtgos (or *h2r.tg^os, for those who follow
traditional notation). I hope that alleviates your shocking
confusion.

So the supposed link with Kartvelian *das^tw-, is either
the result of a loan from a satemized stem *xrtz^o- with
an unexplained *d-, or you're just plain off your rocker and
you imagined the whole thing up in your head. If it _is_ a
true loan, all the broohaha caused by former *tg > *tz^
being metathesized to Kartvelian *s^t would explain a
lack of *x here, in contrast to the "four" word.


Miguel displays more dyslogic:
>Not necessarily. IE *k^t is always borrowed as *s^t in Kartvelian.

Yes, necessarily! IE *k^ is _plain_, not palatal. It was only
palatalized in satem dialects, quickly becoming a sibilant. This
is proven by markedness issues that plague the old concept of
IE phonology and this has been discussed many times before.

There is no motivation then for plain *k to become Kartvelian
*s^ in loans unless it is from a satem dialect where palatalization
had already taken place. That means that it is _necessary_ to
conclude that these are postIE loans.


= gLeN

_________________________________________________________________
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963