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

----- Original Message -----
From: "P&G" <petegray@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 9:10 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] The disappearance of *-s -- The saga continues


> > >In Sanskrit *-eh2ns > *-a:ns and *-o:ns would give the same thing (and
we
> > >have -a:s and -a:n)
> >
> > But -a:s and -a:n _are_ the same thing, basically,
>
> I'm aware that the Vedas show that the masculine -a:n was
originally -a:ns.
> But I can't find anything about the feminine -a:s. So does that mean it
> behavea as if it actually were -a:s without the nasal?

o-stems a. pl. in Vedic -a:n has a sandhi variant -a:m.s before #t- and #V-
I think. There was no such an -m- in sandhi in eh2-stems that I am aware of.

Mate