Re: [tied] Re: Risoe fo the Feminine

On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 22:58:22 +0200, Piotr Gasiorowski
<piotr.gasiorowski@...> wrote:

>28-04-2004 18:02, Miguel Carrasquer wrote:
>
>> 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.
>
>Right. What about a minimalist solution: pre-IIr. *h2wí-s, acc. *h2wí-m,
>gen. *h2wéi-s, pl. *h2wéj-es, etc. declined like (and no stranger than)
>*mn.tí-? For purely phonological reasons *h2wi- happens to be
>monosyllabic (but cf. *trejes from virtual **tri-s). Of course it isn't
>the kind of paradigm that could date back to the most archaic stages of
>PIE, but it's real enough, and the only problem is the aberrant variant
>of the nom.sg. As the word was a was monosyllabic and therefore unusual
> i-stem, perhaps dat. *vay-e, voc. *ve, pl. vay-as were enough to
>establish //vay-// as a pseudo-root noun, hence //váy-s// --> ves. The
>paradigm has been preserved incompletely; perhaps there was a variant
>gen.sg. *v(i)yas as well. Sorry, I can't think of anything better :-)

I take it you're not too keen on including Hitt. suwais in
the equation. Arm. haw is of course ambiguous (/h/ < *s- or
/h/ < *h2- as in the "shepherd" word [even if *H(2/3)o- >
ho- seems to be slightly better supported than *H2a > ha-]).

The nice thing about my solution (for which most of the
credit must of course go to Jens), is that it unifies the
Vedic, Hittite, Armenian, Latin etc. forms into a single
paradigm (*(s)h2woyh1-/*(s)h2weyh1-), and additionally leads
naturally to Greek aietós (*h2wyet-os).

>Skt. also has a neuter *es-stem, <vayas-> 'bird, (small) fowl'.
>
>>>--> 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 arrow "-->" was intended to suggest that pre-Toch. *h2aweyes had the
>same analogical origin as *h2awis. The two just co-evolved together.

Yes. That leaves that genitive form with initial e- (from
*o-).

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