From: Patrick Ryan
Message: 39982
Date: 2005-09-13
----- Original Message -----
From: "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2005 1:06 AM
Subject: Re: [tied] Re: IE thematic presents and the origin of their
thematic vowel
67
> > In phonological terms, there is nothing in IE that seems to
> > suggest /sj/ becoming /sk/, so I doubt that Jens is right.
>
> I agree the phonological aspect of the whole thing is difficult, but in
> morphological and functional terms the equation *-sk^e- = *-s- + *-je-
> is just too attractive to be brushed aside.
>
> > Yet there is a well-known phonological rule whereby (C)VCs(C)
> > sequences become (C)V:Cs(C) ones.
>
> Is there? You put the bracketed (C) here just to account for the
> sigmatic aorist; otherwise such a rule (whose formulation should be
> further refined in order to include at least the lengthening before
> final *h2 as well) is only employed for explaining the lengthened vowels
> of PIE nominatives.
>
> > How common were the "plain" Narten stems in IE?
>
> Not terribly common, which is quite understandable if we are dealing
> with an archaic type of alternation that tended to be eliminated in
> various ways already in the protolanguage. There are some further
> complications that look even more puzzling, such as apparently
> reduplicated stems with a Narten vowel in the reduplication syllable.
> The clearest case is *te:tk^- (a.k.a. *tek^T- in "thorny" terms).
>
> Piotr
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>