On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 14:17:24 +0000, Glen Gordon <
glengordon01@...>
wrote:
>
>Our Miguel-gLeN verbal intercourse procedes:
>>>Why reconstruct needless and unattested laryngeals
>>
>>I don't.
>
>Then if we have both endings like 1ps *-o: and 2ps.middle
>*-so, showing clearly a contrast between *o and *o: even
>finally, your view that *o < *a: begs the necessary but
>futile question: "Where does *o: come from then??"
In the 1sg. thematic, it comes from the contraction of *-owu > *-o:w (as in
the u-stem loc.sg. *-o:w < *-ow-u < *-ow-i or the i-stem loc.sg. *-ey-i >
*-e:y). That's why Tocharian has -ew (= *-o:w) in the 1sg. thematic.
Elsewhere, *-o:w was simplified to *-o: (or analogically reshaped to *-o:m,
as in Slavic) The form *-owu itself can be regularly derived from the
expected 1sg. thematic ending *-o-mW-i by Umlaut of *-i (as in the u-stem
locative sg., or the loc.pl. *-su < *-sW-i), and loss of the occlusion in
*mW. Luwian has -awi.
By Brugmann's Law, final *-o itself is short, so there is no confusion.
=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...