Re: [tied] Brugmann's Law

On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 00:52:31 +0200, Piotr Gasiorowski
<gpiotr@...> wrote:

>The Latin noun is a
>consonantal stem, so the quantity surely requires no laryngeal
>explanation. All one needs is length generalised from the original
>nom.sg., as normally in Latin (<auro:ra>, <cruo:ris>, etc.).

Interestingly, both of these derive their length, not from the nom.sg. *-s,
but from collective ("nom/acc.pl.") *-h2.

>Perhaps
><ro:s> is an old collective ~ mass noun related to *h1er-s-, which would
>allow us to posit an original paradigm like *h1ro:s, acc. *h1ros-m.,
>gen. *h1rés-(e)s (or the like).
>
>Now, Sanskrit has no Brugmannian length in nouns like <dáma-> 'house,
>home' and <mára-> 'death', where other branches point to *o. An
>otherwise invisible laryngeal suffix may often be the reason, as it
>certainly is in cases where the laryngeal manifests itself in some other
>way, cf. <rátha-> 'wagon, chariot' < *rót-h2-o-. This makes the analysis
>of <rása-> 'juice, liquid' as *h1rós-h2-o- a not unjustifiable
>possibility. At the very least, what works for <dáma-> ought to work for
><rása-> as well. I'm not sure about the best derivation of <rasá:>
>'moisture'. It must be the same thing as BSl. *rasa:, so anything like
>*h1res-áh2 is ruled out. *h1ros-h2-áh2 looks cumbersome but may be the
>right solution (related to *h1ros-h2-o- like Lat. rota to Skt. rátha-?).

An original collective *h1rós-h2, thematized early enough to avoid
Szemerényi's law (*hrós-h2 > *h1ró:s(h2)) would indeed do the trick.

Because for me Brugmann's Law (reinterpreted as _shortening_ of *o: in
unstressed and closed syllables) comes early enough, I may even suppose
that the collective ending *-h2 was simply replaced here by the feminine
ending *-ah2, still giving short /a/ in Sanskrit:

*h1&rá:s-h2 -> h1&rós-h2 -> h1ros-áh2 -> rasá:


=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...