--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, enlil@... wrote:
>
> Jens to Richard:
> > The optional marking is with the dative case ending. I do not see
> > the relevance. Surely there were no possessive endings sitting on
> > the possessum in PIE helping to show the construction.
>
> Of course not. That would be accomplished by *-yo.
>
>
> > Certainly not because of a rule pertaining to word-final
position.
> > Inside the word the thematic vowel should alternate and does so
in
> > verbs and pronouns,
>
> So tell us where **ye-syo is to be found then.
That would be the genitive form. Its immediate reflex would be Skt.
yásya, Av. yahiia:. If you are after attestations of the stem *ye-
it cannot be shown unambiguously. There are no attestations of the
cases that would have -e- in Celtiberian or Phrygian, Greek /hó-s/
inflects like the article /ho/ in the rest of the paradigm, and the
Indo-Iranian vocalism is of course ambiguous. But why would it
inflect differently from the other thematic pronouns which form
*tesyo (Goth. this, OPruss. stessei), *esyo (Latin eiius, Goth. is,
Slavic jego, Welsh eidd-aw), *kWesyo (Goth. hwis, OCS c^eso, Avest.
cahiia:, Gk. téo)? Assuming *-yo is at variance with a fundamental
rule of IE morphophonemics. It still could be correct, but then the
safety of it is zero, so that it cannot carry the further
assumptions that are based on it.
Jens