Re: [tied] Re: Monovocalism: sequel

>
>>From: enlil@...
>>
>>Exu:
>> > However, -i is (as far as I know) a final vowel when used as a tense
>> > marker, and hence can not be a thematic vowel in the commonly used
>> > sense.
>>
>>It depends on how you mean. It does appear that we have *i-stems as
>>alternates of *o-stems (the 'thematic stems') for whatever reason. In
>>that sense, *i-stems might be said to be another kind of thematic stem.
>>Of course 'thematic stems' are being used untraditionally here in a
>>sense more sensitive to the apparent etymology of these items and you're
>>correct that thematic stems are normally of the alternating-*e/*o kind.
>
> If you really want to change the meaning of commonly used vocabulary, I
> have
> not objections. Hoever, it will make it very difficult to speak with you.
>

Exu:

> Or are you somehow saying that the *-i present tense maker in verbal
> endings and the *-i nominal roots are related?

No.

> In IE "thematic" vowels are usually the -e/o- vocalism that can occur
> in some verbal categories. -i stems are nouns, not verbs, usually.

Yes I know. However, Jens and I were discussing the relationship of
stems in *-o-/*-e- and those in *-i- for sometime now. We've both come
to agree that they are related, however I go further and connect the
phenomenon with *i-reduplication and claim that *i here derives from the
same phonetic schwa. I say that while voicing determines the development
of *o posttonically instead of *e, pretonically it becomes *i in closed
open syllables. Jens disagrees vehemently.


= gLeN