Re: [tied] Re: Accusative was allative

> But Polish ów expresses 3-deixis.

It is easy to explain a change from 1/2-deixis to 3-deixis: "this near me" > "this" > "he/she/it". > In any case, these are all innovations. The original Slavic > system was sI "this", tU "that", onU (oblique je-) "that > yonder". The pronoun ovU.. ovU ( = Greek ho mèn .. ho dé, > "the one .. the other", "this one .. that one") stood > outside of the system, and was by its nature available to > substitute for a lost <sI> (as in Serbo-Croatian or > Macedonian), or for a lost [=> personal pronoun] <onU> (as > in Polish).

This is the system of Church Slavonic, but the Proto-Slavic was wider. Some more traces of *vU: Rus. vot "here is...", von "there is..." < *vU-tU, vU-nU. >>> The usual development *mw- > *b(w)- is reversed or blocked >>> by a following /n/. >> > Only in Terkic. In all other Altaic (and, further, Nostratic) groups the suppletive w/bV : mV cannot be explained phonetically. > Yes it can. Once again, Aleksandr Vovin reconstructs: > Proto-Manchu-Tungus: > 1. *bi, *min- > 2. *si, *sin- > 1. *bu, *mun- > 2. *suu, *suun- > (1 incl. *bï-t, *mïn-t-) > Proto-Mongolian: > 1. *bi, *min- (also *na-, cf. PK) > 2. *ti > *ci, *tin- > *cin- (also *cim-) > 1. *ba, *man- > 2. *ta, *tan- > (1 incl. *bi-da, *bi-da-n-) > Proto-Turkic: > 1. *bän ~ *män- > 2. *sän > 1. *bir2 > 2. *sir2 > Proto-Korean: > 1. *na > 2. *ne > 1. *(b)uri > 2. *nehuy > Proto-Japanese: > 1. *ban > 2. *sO-, na

No phonetical law on denasalisation of initial consonants has been established for Proto-Mongolian, Proto-Manchu-Tungus or Proto-Altaic. It exists only in Turkic. See new "Etymological dictionary of Altaic languages" by S.Starostin et al.

By the way, the mentioned Proto-Turkic reconstruction of 1Sg is surely incorrect. Cf. Chuv. ebE : man- < *V-bi : *men-. So all other Turkic languages have a form that historically is derived from the oblique stem, but the Proto-Turkic system was very similar to that of Mongolic and Tungus-Manchu. And in Japanese, also a stem 1. *nga- is reconstructed by Starostin (of course, /ng/ is a velar nasal here).> The Anlaut of Goth. <jains>, German <jener>, Eng. <yonder> > suggests a development out of the relative/interrogative > stem *yo-. Such a development exists in Balto-Slavic as well. Also cf. in Latin: Iuvenis illuc venit. Cui interrogatum erat... "The young man came there. He (lit. which) was asked...". But in all these examples the stem in relative, not interrogative. Of cousre, the latter can easily change into the former, which in turn would change into a demonstrative, but note that in reality the whole cycle of changes has been nowhere attested.