Re: [tied] Re: Syncope

Richard:

> You don't get it because you've dropped the 'which'.
> The analysis being considered is *tesyo = *tes + *yo. with
> *tes meaning 'with him' and *yo meaning 'which'. The
> question then becomes, 'Why is the relative not inflected?',

Because it would be in IE itself, but not in earlier layers
of IE when the modifier and modified did not agree in
case. So *-yo is in the endingless locative, which it needs
to have been declined in to have originally conveyed "_WITH_
him" in the first place. In mLIE, it's *tasya (*ta-s + *ya).
Later, confusion with the thematic paradigm caused the *e/*o
alternation. Hence in IE itself, *tesyo is simply the new
_genitive_ form and the locative nuance has been lost.

> By the time of PIE *yo would have agreed with *pode in
> gender and number.

Yes, but not in mLIE and previous layers.


= gLeN