[tied] Re: Bader's article on *-os(y)o

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

> On Sat, 01 May 2004 11:52:58 +0000, elmeras2000
> <jer@...> wrote:
>
> >--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...>

wrote:

> >> However, the ending -as in <wastulas> is simply the thematic
> >> nominative (if it's a nominative) or the Hittite thematic
> >> genitive (if it's a genitive). The thematic declension may
> >> originally have conveyed something like a definite meaning,
> >> but one cannot attribute the double function of definite
> >> marker _and_ genitive marker to the single morpheme *-os.
> >
> >I cannot see the basis for calling it "thematic":
>
> It's the synchronic genitive ending of thematic nouns in
> Hittite.
>
> >-as is the
> >genitive ending of *all* nouns in Hittite, regardless of stem

class.

> >With that in mind one cannot use -as to demonstrate very much.
>
> As I said:
>
> "Leaving aside preconceptions, there is a good chance that
> this [thematic G. -as] continues an original them.gen. ending
> *-os, and there is an equally good chance that it represents
> analogical spread of athematic *-os to the o-stems."

Yes you did, and that makes it twisted. Wastul- is a consonant stem,
so there is no reason to expect it to have *thematic* endings. And
when you find it has the same genitive as all other Hittite nouns,
it is highly biased to use that as evidence of a *thematic*
genitive. I have no means of checking wastulas right here, but the
parallel tayazilas 'of theft, thief' is used of the object a number
of times in the laws, so it cannot be a nominative.

Jens