Re: [tied] Re: Risoe fo the Feminine

On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 16:17:54 +0200, Piotr Gasiorowski
<piotr.gasiorowski@...> wrote:

>28-04-2004 13:59, Miguel Carrasquer wrote:
>> On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 03:14:34 +0200, Miguel Carrasquer
>> <mcv@...> wrote:
>
>> The archaic Vedic nominative vé:s must come from *HwóiHs.
>> If the ending had been simply *-oi, that would have given
>> lengthened nom.sg. -o:is > Skt. -a: (e.g. sakha:).
>
>If it's indeed archaic and not back-formed from the allomorph <vi-> and
>the genitive (to replace **áva:).

There can be no phonetic explanation for a development *áva:

> vé:s, nor can there be an analogical explanation.

Analogical pressure would have been on keeping/making the
nom. and gen. distinct (as is indeed the case for the
clearly analogical newer nominative form vís, after acc.
vím), not on merging them. As a general principle, analogy
is unlikely to yield bizarre and unique forms such as a
nom.sg. vé:s.

> I suppose something relatively simple
>like *h2áwo:i, *h2áwim, h2wéis, h2wi[j]óm

The genitive of -o:i stems is *-yos, not *-eis, and we would
expect a Skt. paradigm *áva:, *áva:yam, *avyás (or *ávyur,
like sákhyur), none of which are actually found in Skt. vé:s
(vís), vím, vé:s, so I'm afraid such a reconstruction does
not even yield a point of departure for analogy.

For similar reasons, I must also reject Jens' reconstruction
*(s)Háwoih1s, *(s)Hwéih1s, which would have yielded Skt.
*áve:s, A. *ávim(?) G. *vé:s, which is unlikely to have
given the attested forms by analogy. Everything points to
the nom. form vé:s being archaic, not innovated, so there
was no vowel after *(s)H- and before *-w- (as confirmed by
the Iranian and Albanian forms). This also solves the
Hittite problem, where *sh2aw- would have given *ishaw-ais
(or *ishum-ais), and Jens' *sh1aw-/*sh3aw- [with unexplained
/a/] perhaps *sawais or *sumais, but not s(u)wais <
*sHwói(H)s.

The paradigm is then end-stressed and lengthened
("collective"):

nom. *(s)xawá:yt-z > *(s)h2wóih1s
acc. *(s)xawá:yt-m > *(s)h2wóih1m
gen. *(s)xawa:yt-ás > *(s)h2wéi(t)s

>(with branch-specific
>levellings) would suffice to generate all the attested reflexes, and to
>account for *o-h2wi-om. Why can't the Greek and Celtic forms involve a
>suffix not present in the basic form (*h2awi-eto-, related, as you
>suggest, to the *-os/*-es- of Gmc. *ajjes- < *h2awjes-)?
>
>...
>> ToB eye, pl. awi (EIEC: *h2owe:is, *h2awéies)
>>
>> Vedic has short a- (not a:-) which must come from the
>> oblique forms in *h2a-. Elsewhere, nom. -o- has been
>> transferred to the oblique, except in the Toch. plural,
>> which shows /a/. The laryngeal in Anatolian is more
>> suggestive of *h2 than *h3 (*h3 is usually(?) lost). Arm.
>> h- here can reflect either *h2 or *h3.
>> The Germanic and Tocharian forms suggest the possibility of
>> a heavy *oy-stem paradigm *h2ówo:ys, acc. *h2ówim, gen.
>> *h2áwyos, later regularized to *owis, *owim, *owyos (*awis,
>> *awim, *awyas in Sanskrit).
>
>Adams's pre-Tocharian forms in the EIEC look monstrous.

Yes.

>Ronald Kim
>(2000) derives the Tocharian B forms much more plausibly:
>
>*h2ówi-/*h2áwi-
>
>--> nom.sg. *h2áwis > *awi > *awu (with assimilatory rounding, of which
>other examples are offered) > PToch. *aw& > Toch.B a:[u]w ([u] =
>subscript <u>), a sg. reported by Pinault. The form *eye (unattested
>directly but restored from the gen. <ey[e]tse>) must be some kind of
>derivative, but Kim admits that the details are not clear to him.
>--> nom.pl. *h2aweyes > *aweyes > PToch. aw'&y& > pre-Toch.B ay&y& > awi

The original nom.pl. form must have had /o/
(*h2oweies/*h2owoies), so I think it's more likely that /a/
comes from the (pl.) oblique, *h2aw-i-bhios etc.

>The Vedic short /a/ is ambiguous. As Jens has suggested here, it could
>be analogical to the closed-syllable oblique variant as in <ávyas>, no
>matter if the vowel comes from *a or from *o. Kim also quotes an East
>Iranian example (Waxi yobc^, probably reflecting *a:wi-c^a:) that seems
>to exhibit the regular operation of Brugmann's Law.

=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...