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

On Sun, 23 May 2004 14:54:15 +0000, elmeras2000
<jer@...> wrote:

>Verbal sg. -o- : pl. -e- is found in two places: (1) Hitt. hi-
>conjugative sakki sekkweni, arhi erweni, etc. (2) Goth. prt. bar :
>be:rum.

The Germanic case is not ablaut /o/ ~ /e/ at all: it's an
alternation /o/ ~ /e:/.

>The weak preterite type be:rum, ge:bum, ne:mum is generally explained as
>analogical on root with initial *H1-. There are not many examples
>that can serve as a model: A candidate is *H1em- 'take', so that
>ne:mum is perhaps from *H1e-H1em-me >> *e:mum -> *n-e:mum in case
>the /n-/ can be credited to a fossilized preverb.

I see no reason to assume that.

>Another could be
>*H1ed- 'eat', giving *H1e-H1d-me >> *e:tum, OHG âzum, ON átum, where
>the structure /e:t-/ has been generalized to the whole verb (sg. âz,
>át).

This is a genuine verb with initial *h1-, and the fact that
we have /e:/ throughout the preterite shows that it has
nothing to do with the type of be:rum, ge:bum, ne:mum etc.

The Germanic verbs with /e:/ in the plural preterite are
those verbs which have a root structure ending in a single
resonant (ne:m-, be:r-) or obstruent (le:g-, se:t-, le:s-).
They would have been expected to show zero grade in the
plural (as the verbs in classes I (*-oi ~ *-i), II (*-ou ~
*-u) and III (*-oRC ~ *-R.C)). Instead they show /e:/,
which I would explain as due to the fact that the
reduplication vowel in the plural (at least the 3pl.) was
originally stressed /é:/ (causing the 3pl. ending to be
reduced from -érs to -r.s). Haplological reduction of the
root-initial consonsant produces the attested forms:
*né:-nm-r.s > *né:m-r.s, *bhé:-bhr-r.s > *bhé:r-r.s,
*ghé:-ghb-r.s > *ghé:bh-r.s, etc.

>We do not find *wednós at all

Hitt. wetenas reflects it quite accurately.

>, but it may well be precisely the form
>we should posit. The full picture contains *wód-r. and, for the weak
>cases, the presence of full-grade in the root and of gradation in
>the suffix. Rieken posits "*wód-r., gen. *wéd-n.-s (-> *ud-n-és)/*ud-
>én", assuming a change of the genitive to Hitt. witenas on the
>pattern of the antonym pahhur, gen. pahhuenas 'fire', but with
>preservation of the full-grade /wed-/ in the root. The collective
>has wida:r reflecting *wéd-o:r

No, *wed-ó:r.

>, gen. *ud-n-ós (Rieken *ud-n-és), in
>Hittite with accent levelling on the second syllable, but with a
>unique retention of the full-grade of the root which used to be
>accented (and still is in Greek húdo:r).

And isn't in Skt. udá:, Hitt. witá:r, Lith. vanduõ. The
Greek form obviously has retracted the accent, as shown by
the zero grade of *(h)ud-.

>> Similarly,
>> the genitive of *nokWts would be *nekWtós while *nekWts must be a
>> later contracted form which coincidentally is only attested in
>> Hittite in the phrase /nekuz mehhur/.
>> Does it exist outside this phrase?
>
>No, nekuz is still expressly reported to exist only in this
>phrase: "das allein in der Verbindung /nekuz mehur/ '(zur)
>Nachtzeit' auftritt" (Elisabeth Rieken, Untersuchungen zur nominalen
>Stammbildung des Hethitischen, Wiesbaden 1999, p. 128). The
>monosyllabic form of the old genitive is confirmed by Old Latin
>nox 'at night'.

Despite Hitt. nekuz and Slavic nekWto- in the "bat" word,
the weak form of this word seems to have been *n.kWt-: Ved.
aktá: "night", aktú- "dark, night", Germanic *unhtu-
"morning". Since we need an **u here anyway to explain the
labiovelar, I would reconstruct *nú(:)kt-z, *nú(:)kt-m,
*nu(:)kt-ás -> *nókWts, *nókWtm (*nékWtm/*núkWtm), *n.kWtés
(*nukWtés), which also nicely accounts for Greek núks,
nuktós.


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