Re: [tied] Talking of locatives [Was: Some thoughts...]

On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 12:46:54 +0200, Piotr Gasiorowski
<gpiotr@...> wrote:

>
>On 04-10-05 23:48, Miguel Carrasquer wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 11:15:47 +0200, Piotr Gasiorowski
>> <gpiotr@...> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>In other words, does the
>>>locative *-i derive from older *iN?
>>
>>
>> In that case, we would expect to see *-ir, as perhaps in
>> "here" < *k^e-ir.
>
>Syllable-final sequences of PIE *i or *u plus a nasal or liquid were
>rare and restricted to special cases where the morphological motivation
>to stabilise them is obvious (infixed nil-grades like *linkW- from
>*leikW-, accusatives of *-i-/*-u- roots). It's quite imaginable that if
>*-ir ever arose word-finally, it was quickly simplified to *-i.

That's indeed what happened with *-un > *-ur neuters, where
only Armenian maintains the -r (with regular loss of -u-):
*g^onur > cunr "knee", *drak^ur > artawsr, etc.

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