Re: [tied] The disappearance of *-s -- The saga continues

From: elmeras2000
Message: 31846
Date: 2004-04-11

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

> Well, maybe we're both wrong because with accusative plural
> *-ns and *kWi-s "who" nothing seems to work, not even your
> rule.

For what it's worth, I think this is a place where we have to
distinguish the s's. The sibilant of the nominative was oroginally
different from the one marking the plural in the acc.pl. ending *-ns
or *-ms. I think it shows that difference here: It was *-é:nz, *-
é:rz and *-o:nz, *-o:rz, *-o:yz that developed into PIE *-é:n, *-
é:r, *-o:n, *-o:r, *-o:y. The other sibilants neither lengthened nor
disappeared. In the end all retained sibilants became PIE /s/, which
is why many won't believe it.

Jens