[tied] Re: Thematic vowel etc

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

> On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 10:35:09 +0000, tgpedersen
> <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
>
> >
> >One more Sturtevant quote, ibidem:
> >
> >The enclistic pronoun _-as^- 'is' [he] contains the pronominal

stem

> >that appears in Skt. _asya_, Av. _ahe_ 'eius'. The reason why

this

> >stem is so rare in IE is that it has been supplanted by the
> >conglomerate _tom_, etc.
>
> It's not rare at all. It's rare in the nominative and
> accusative, but that because in Hittite the forms *os, *om
> have supplanted original *is, *im.
>
> >The connective _to_ might be followed by
> >other envclitic pronouns, as in Hitt. _ta-as^-s^e_ 'et ei, et

sibi'.

> >Such are IH _sme_, _smy_ that appear in Skt. _tasmai_ 'ei' ans
> >_tasmin_ 'in eo'."
> >
> >I can't understand why he doesn't recognize his own reconstructed
> >accusative *_som_ in IH _sme_, _smy_ here (eg. *to-os-so-om-o-i

etc)?

>
> *to-smo-ei, *to-sm-i-n, where *-sm(o)- is probably from *sem
> "1". There is no accusative *som in PIE (the form is *tom).
>

That's right. Those confounded Romans invented som, sam to confuse
honest linguists.

Torsten