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

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:

> We have to distinguish between several possibilities:
> (1) *-we-/*-ye- medially in a root or suffix
> (2) *w-e/*y-e across a morpheme boundary
> (3) root-initial *we-/*ye-
> (4) suffix-initial *-we/*-ye
>
> In cases 1/2, the normal outcome is full-grade *yé/*wé, but
> usually with variants *í/*ú. In case 3, the outcome is
> full-grade *wé/*yé, in case 4 the outcome is *í/*ú.

But the variants must be generalized zero-grades, mustn't they? So
they must in 4:

> Examples:
>
> (1) *dhwó:r G. *dhwérs or *dhúrs "door"; *swépnos ~ *súpnos
> "sleep, dream"
> (2) *peh2wr. G. *ph2wéns or *ph2úns "fire",
> *séh2wl. G. *sh2wé(l)ns or *sh2ú(l)ns "sun";
> (3) *wódr. G. *wédnos "water";
> (4) *'-wo:ts, G. *-úsos ptc.pf.act.; *kWét-wor-es, gen.
> *kW(e)t-úr-o(:)m "4";

The status as is not secured or even likely for thee -u- of any of
these examples.

Greek hu:lé:essa 'forest-covered' shows a suffix *-wetja created by
a blend of the alternants *-watja (Ved. -vati:) and a masc. *-went-
seen only here. Ergo the full grade had /-we-/ (does follow).

>
> >> The Sanskrit accent is
> >> original here, as it in in e.g. the gen.sg. of the
> >> ptc.pf.act. *'-wot-s, *-ús-os.
> >
> >The accent of the type cakr.vá:n, cakr.vá:m.sam, cakrús.as is
> >strange because it sort of moves the wrong way. Still it is
> >constantly on the vowel following the root, and in the type with
> >asyllabic root dadvá:n, dadús.as, dadús.a:m it is fully columnal,
> >being constantly on the second syllable. Now, columnal accent is
> >very like Sanskrit, and not unlike PIE itself, so I assume that

the

> >short type set the model for the longer type in deciding which
> >segments were to be accented. A columnal accent does not have to
> >have been brought about by the ablaut alone, it can easily be
> >secondary. Therefore, this does not prove original accent on -us-

,

> >for which I will assume that it is what it looks like, the zero-
> >grade variant of the suffix reduced in originally unstressed
> >position.
>
> And I will assume that the unmodified form (oblique -ús-) is
> original, while the secondary strong forms (-vá:n, -vá:m.sam
> for original *'-wo:t-s, *'-wot-m) also have secondary
> accent.

And blown-up super-fullgrade? I find you in contempt of the
material.

Jens