Re: [tied] IE *de:(y)- 'bind'.

----- Original Message -----

From: elmeras2000

To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Friday, May 20, 2005 6:10 PM

Subject: Re: [tied] IE *de:(y)- 'bind'.

 

<snip>

 

>   ***
>   Patrick wrote:
>
>   First, in my opinion, the formant for the stative has the shape -
*Ha- in PIE.

That is not a morphological segment I know with this function. Where
have you got it from?

***

Patrick writes:

 

I misspoke. *-Ha in Nostratic; *-He in PIE.

***

>   Second, I think you know very well what "stative" is. "Belonging
to or designating a class of verbs which express a state or
condition".

Okay, I do now. Others use the term differently.
 
>   We have already exhaustively discussed that verbal roots of the
form *CVy- if, originally durative, cannot be shown to behave
exclusively as we would expect durative verbs to do. It is possible
that *yaH- may have undergone a similar loss of definition.

You may think we have discussed this exhaustively, but I do not
understand what you are talking about. In what way do originally
durative roots ending in /y/ not behave like durative roots would be
expected to? What funny expectations did you have?

***

Patrick writes:

 

Let me remind you. We discussed exhaustively whether roots of the form *CVy- showed up as duratives, and decided that the final *-y in biliterals did not automatically make them durative. Remember now?

***

 

>   Since you adamantly deny the possibility of statives of the form
*CVH-, how would it be possible for you to say what inflections
might have been used with it -- if it existed?
>   ***

A stative derivative is formed by means of the suffix *-eH1-, zero-
grade alternant *-H1-; its present stem is in *-H1-yé/ó-, while the
aorist has *-éH1-. After a root-final laryngeal the laryngeal of the
present would not be detectable.

***

Patrick writes:

 

Come on, Jens.

 

Do you just want to obfuscate or do you truly not understand what I write?

 

I claimed that *CVH was originally a stative form, the durative form of which would be *CVy-.

 

What happens after *CVC where the final *C is not a laryngeal or *y had nothing to do with the question.

***

 

>   >   Very simply! *daHy- in zero grade: *H become *i;  *a becomes
Ø;
>   diy- before consonant become di:-, before vowel becomes diy.
>   >   ***
JER:
>   That is not the way IE ablaut works.
>
>   ***
>   Patrick wrote:
>
>   I think it does, at least for Old Indian.
>   ***

Where do you see that? You *postulate* it for di:ná- under an
unmotivated theory of how that may be derived, but what material has
shown you that this is the regular treatment "at least for Old
Indian"? I collected the entire material some years ago, and I do
not have a single example like di:ná-. What have I missed?

***

Patrick writes: 

 

I thought we acknowledged at least two di:ná-.

***
 
<snip>

 

>   ***
>   Patrick wriote:
>
>   Oh, so laryngeals do not leave any traces in IE-derived
languages?

Not after the laryngeals have vanished which is what I understood
your words "in IE-derived language" to refer to. If you count
indirect evidence they may, in the right setting, leave the trace
that the /y/ is vocalized and appears as [i].

***

Patrick writes:

 

Well, I simply disagree.

 

Laryngeals show up by lengthening the foregoing vowel.

 

Patrick

***
Jens




------------------------ 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/