[tied] Re: Syncope

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, enlil@... wrote:

> Jens:
> > No, we were speaking of *wert-mn as a type.
>
> Type of what? Type of ablaut pattern?

Type of word structure, being an example of a root ending in a
cluster followed by a suffix beginning with a consonant, this making
a total of three consonants in a row already before the time ablaut
even begins to cause any kind of reduction. For reasons you did not
state you said that could not be. Later you said you could accept
the example under an analysis where you squeeze in a vowel of your
own invention.

> > I do not see any reason to doubt the authenticity of
> > *wert-mn.
>
> Neither do I really with QAR at my side now. However I'm
> just saying that *wertmn isn't necessarily ancient even if
> it shows a regular ablaut.
>
>
> > And I see very strong reasons to suspect the language had
> > at least *some* words of that structure since it allowed
> > this one to be created.
>
> Bingo.

Precisely.

>
> > If you mean lengthening when you write Quantitative Ablaut,
> > I'd say yes, the nominative lengthening applied to an
> > intermediate stage in the vanishing process e > o > zero,
> > so that from unaccented /e/ we get the result /o:/.
> > Did you see a need to tell me that?
>
> Erh, wait. Nominative Lengthening (Szemernyi) has nothing
> to do with quantitative ablaut but even so, I thought you
> said that nominative *-s was actually *-z in the past and
> that's the reason for lengthening, not ablaut.

Yes, I have said that, and it still is the way I see it. There is no
definition of ablaut that makes this fall outside of it, unless you
introduce one now.

So, when you write Quantitative Ablaut, you do not mean e : zero,
for that is "Syncope". And you do not mean lengthening as in the
nominative, for that is "Szemerényi". I am not sure if you accept
lengthened grade for IE, and even less sure whether your term
Quantitative Ablaut refers to it. Why don't you just tell us what
the term *does* refer to in your usage?

Jens