On Tue, 08 Feb 2005 21:50:37 +0000, Rob
<
magwich78@...> wrote:
>--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:
>
>> *pot-i-s is not very complex. It an i-stem (in my opinion,
>> an *in-stem) based on *pot-. I see no basis for an analysis
>> *po-t-.
>
>Okay. But what did the supposed root *pot- mean?
What does *po- mean?
*pot- has to do with power (Skt. patyate: "rules", Alb. pata
"had", Lat. potis "able", possum "am able", potestas
"power", etc.). I'm not sure how to relate the emphatic
particle -pot (Hittite -pat, Lith. pat "self"). The root
may also be present in *nepot-.
>> >However, the Vedic form pátih. does
>> >not seem to fit the reconstructed o-vocalism (the form should be
>> >*pá:tih. via Brugmann's Law, I think).
>>
>> The Vedic paradigm is:
>> N pátis
>> A pátim
>> G pátyur
>> D pátye:
>> L pátya:u
>> I pátya:
>>
>> f pátni:
>>
>> where only the N and A have an open syllable. The original
>> PIE nominative was *pótyo:n (= Toch. B petso), also with a
>> closed syllable, so Brugmann's law could only have worked in
>> the accusative, where short /a/ was analogically restored.
>
>What's the evidence for an original nominative in *pótyo:n? Why did
>the vast majority of the daughter languages transform it into an i-
>stem, then?
The word contained a suffixal *-n- as can be deduced from
the feminine form *potnih2. If we further assume that the
suffix was **-in-, and that *-ín- was palatalized to *-íny-
> *-éy-, we get the following paradigm (stress was
apparently retracted to the stem from a suffix containing *i
_before_ the shortening of pretonic vowels, in a move
reminiscent of the retraction of stress from yers in
Slavic):
N *pá:t-in-z > pá:t-y&n-z
A *pá:t-in-m > pá:t-y&(n)-m
G *pa:t-ín-a:s > pá:t-&y-os
D *pa:t-in-ái > pá:t-y&n-&`i ~ pá:t-&y-&i
L *pa:t-ín-ai > pá:t-&y-&i
I *pa:t-in-át > pá:t-y&n-&`t ~ pá:t-&y-&t,
f *pá:t-in-ih2 > pá:t-&n-ih2
which gives:
*pót-yo:n
*pót-im
*pót-yos
*pót-in-èi ~ pót-y(e)i
*pót-(e)yi
*pót-in-èh1 ~ pót-y(e)h1
*pót-n-ih2
The nominative *pótyo:n is directly reflected in Tocharian B
petso (e < *o, ts < *ty, -o < *-o:n). Elsewhere the word
was turned into a more or less regular i-stem, with N.
*pótis after acc. *pótim, G. *pótyos or *póteis, L.
*pótye:y, etc., mainly because *pótis may have been the only
word in its class. There are a few other words with *-in-,
but they are all neuters: Skt. ásthi, asthnas "bone"
(**h2os-tkin-) [Armenian oskr], áks.i, áks.n.as "eye"
(*HókW-tHin-), sákthi, sákthnas "thigh" (*skn.g-tHin-),
dádhi, dádhnas "curds" (*dhe-dh&1-(i)n-).
A more common category (also mostly neuters) are the words
in **-un-, which became u-stems (*-ún- > *-éw-). We have
*g^onu(r), *g^énwos "knee", *pók^u(r), *pék^wos [*pék^ur,
*pk^wós] "cattle", *dóru(r), *dérwos "tree/oak",
*h2ák^ru(r), *h2ákruos "tear", etc. Armenian has retained
-r (< *-n) in these words (cunr "knee", asr "fleece",
artawsr "tear") and in adjectives such as barjr, G. barju,
Pl. (n-stem!) barjunk` "high" (m. *bhérg^hus n.
*bhérg^hu(r), G. *bhr.g^hwós, Pl. *bhérg^hunes), and traces
of *-un- are also clearly visible in Skt., e.g. dá:ru
"wood", G. dro:s / drúnas, L. dá:runi, I. drúna:.
=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...