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

----- Original Message -----
From: "elmeras2000" <jer@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 11:05 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] The disappearance of *-s -- The saga continues


> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Mate Kapovic" <mkapovic@...>
> wrote:
>
> > Let's see: *-o:ns > IIr, Celtic (Old Irish -u, Celtiberian -us?)
> > *-ons > Gothic, Old Prussian?
> > indecisive - Latin (same as Greek), Greek (original or Osthoff),
> BSl (there
> > is a lot of mangling there in a. pl., I would prefere the secondary
> > laryngeal in *-ons from eh2-stems)
>
> What silliness is this? Why would a pre-Balto-Slavic set masc. *-
> ons, fem. *-aH2s change to *-oH2ns, *-aH2s? This does not even look
> analogical.

*-n- was certainly introduced in Lith. and Slavic in eh2-stems and then we
have *-eh2ns : *-ons and because of the acute in Lith. we have to have
*-oh2ns analogically. Laryngeal *definitely* produces BSl acute, for a
simple long vowel that is very doubtful. Very simple really...

Mate