From: Patrick Ryan
Message: 36434
Date: 2005-02-21
----- Original Message -----From: tgpedersenSent: Monday, February 21, 2005 10:27 AMSubject: [tied] Re: The Hoffmann suffix
<snip>
That is, the *-r nominative of the heteroclitic inflection, you mean?
But the question is (I think), since all these heteroclitic neuters
denote stuffs (for want of a better term, ie. something in which
something can be; or locations) why can't the *-r have been an old
locative? Cf. Dutch "er word gedanst", Danish "der danses" with *-r
_locatives_ as formal subjects? That would make a place open for a
nominative *-oH in the paradigm, which would show up in Gothic? It's
not that I don't recognize that your traditional analysis in terms of
two independent paradigms, and conversion of the "water" word from
one to the other, is possible, but is there compelling evidence for
it?
Torsten
PCR: Rather than a locative, I believe "nominative" -r is a partitive contrasting with a definite -n.Patrick
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
What would our lives be like without music, dance, and theater?
Donate or volunteer in the arts today at Network for Good!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/TzSHvD/SOnJAA/79vVAA/GP4qlB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
cybalist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/