Re: [tied] Definite adjectives: correction

----- Original Message -----
From: "Miguel Carrasquer" <mcv@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 3:22 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] Definite adjectives: correction


> The soft stems of course have -(j)i everywhere (loc.sg., masc.nom.pl., n.
> nom/acc. du.). Why should only the nom.pl. have been subjected to
analogy?
>
>
> >From the point of view of PIE, we don't need to assume any kind of
analogy:
> the result in Slavic follows directly from the nature of the ending in
> question:
>
> the locative sg. is *-i
> the non-masculine NA dual is *-ih1
>
> the pronominal plural marker is *-y
> the optative suffix is *-yeh1-
>
> The first two begin with the vowel *i, the last two begin with the
> consonant *y.
>
> If we prefix the thematic vowel *-o- or the feminine suffix *-ah2-, we
get:
>
> masc.loc.sg. *-o-i > *-oï > *-e^
> fem.loc.sg. *-ah2-i > *-aï > *-e^
> n. NA. dual *-o-ih1 > *-oï > *-e^
> f. NA. dual *-ah2-ih1 > *-aï > *-e^
>
> masc.nom.pl. *-o-y > *-oy > *-i
> 2sg. optative *-o-yh1-s > *-oy > *-i
>
> All regular, no analogy necessary.

There cannot be any difference between *-i and *-y endings because *i and *y
is one and same vowel the difference between *i and *y being only in
position (allophones). Also, you are trying to solve a Slavic problem by
projecting it to the PIE level which is clearly wrong seeing that Baltic
shows no such difference, cf. Lith. fem. D. sg. -ai and masc. n. pl. -ai
which are the same. This points to the fact that Pre-Common-Slavic also had
D. *-ai and n. *-ai here and that *-ai/*-ei > *-e/*-i difference is probably
very young and of analogical origin. I see no reason to search in PIE for a
solution, and I see no phonological answer to the problem in Slavic, so I
conclude it is most probable it is an analogical change of *-ai > *-ei (*-e
> *-i) in masc. n. pl. and imperative.

Mate

Mate