On 04-10-06 09:25, Sergejus Tarasovas wrote:
>>From: Sergejus Tarasovas [mailto:S.Tarasovas@...]
>>Is
>>it possible that another Balto-Slavic "suffix of
>>appurtenance" -- *-i(j)a- -- is actually a generalization of
>>the same sequence without a hiatus-filler (or, rather, with
>>[j] acting as a hiatus-filler)?
>>
>
> I should have written -*-(i)ja- (I meant, eg., Lith. -y~s (~ -is) < *-ija-,
> -ias < *-ja-, Slavic *-j-).
The problem is that there are other possible sources of superficially
similar sequences. We have the common-or-garden *-jo- (+ its Sievers
variant *-ijo-) that comes from thematic *-o- extended with another *-o-
in the process of derivation (according to Jens, whose "double thematic"
analysis I accept), as in *wl.kW-jo- from *wl.kWo-; then we have *-ejo-
(fem. -iah2), which apparently underlies various mass nouns and related
formations is several branches (including Slavic *-Ije). What particular
forms with BSl. *-(i)ja- look de-locatival to you?
Of course there's no shortage of Slavic adjectives in *-InU < *-ino-.
Piotr