Re: [tied] Definite adjectives: correction

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Sergejus Tarasovas"
<S.Tarasovas@...> wrote:

Some second thoughts.

> their Standard
> Lithuanian counterparts _artì_ (note an erroneus analysis in EIEC:

<

> *i-stem *h2értis),

Or correct, if the adverbs in -ì are from the i-stems (*-íe < *-é:i)
rather than o-stems locative; that would naturally explain the very
existence of variants like _artie~_ (< o-stems Lsg) ~ _artì_ (< i-
stems Lsg).

> The "free" (unagglutinated) Lsg ending is not directly attested for
> the i-stems; archaic Lithuanian and dialects would point to -ije
> (thus most likely < *-i *én) as an older variant, and the adessive
> sg. of _akìs_ 'eye' (a C-stem shifted to the i-stems) is _akìpi_ (<

*-

> ì 'Lsg' *píe), so the free form would be *-ì ( < *-íe < *-é:i ?).

But dialects and archaic Lithuanian also have -e:jè, as if directly
from *-e:i *én. To sum up, we don't know what the "free" Lsg endings
of the i- and u-stems were exactly. The evidence doesn't contradict
direct reflexes of PIE *-e:i and *-o:u, but leaves room for other
interpretations (eg, the i-stems Lsg ending might well reflect PIE *-
i rather than *-e:i).

Sergei