Concerning superlong vowels and **e:: > *o:, I emote:
> [gLeNny crInGes and shIvErs] Ick...
Piotr:
> What's so icky about it?
I can't see anyone speaking this language. Unless
we're talking about sci-fi, improbable and overly
"mathematical" languages make me cringe :) There
has to be a human sensitivity to the interpretations
we place on our raw linguistic analyses in order to
properly flesh out pre-IE.
> Almost needless to say after so much discussion,
> this is best illustrated by the long-vowelled
> nom.sg. of animate root nouns.
But if the lengthening of the nominative singular
is due to the irregular loss of final *-a in MIE
nom.sg ending *-sa, then this isn't an issue. It
would affect both *e and *a, causing *e: and *a:.
Vowel Shift makes that *e: and *o: respectively.
> The e-nominatives are typically simple action
> nouns or agent nouns with stative values like
> *ne:k^-s 'death', *pre:k^-s 'prayer, request',
> *spe:k^-s 'watcher', *gWHe:n 'killer' or *dje:u-s
> 'shining'.
Or rather *ne:ks '(act of) dying' => 'death',
*pre:ks '(act of) pleading' => 'prayer, request'
and *dye:us '(act of) shining'. The other two,
which are agent root nouns (*spe:ks and *gHWe:n)
would be later forms during the stages after Syncope
when normally the e-grade _thematic_ nouns take
over to convey these 'action noun' forms.
These latter nouns keep their thematic vowel *a from
MIE because of the shape of their stem (CVCC-), and
so, they in turn supply that pattern to the deverbal
noun stems from the simpler verb shape CVC-. A few
athematic action nouns like the above survive Syncope
and this later analogical levelling.
> In the weak cases the accent moves to the
> inflectional ending: (*pr.k^-ós, *diw-ós, etc.).
Which would be the big tip-off that the original MIE
nominative and genitive forms of the action nouns
you stated above are without original long vowel as
I have claimed all along:
MIE eLIE
*néka-sa => *ne:ks
*naká-sa => *nekás
*paréka-sa => *pre:ks
*paraká-sa => *prkás
*t:ayéwa-sa => *dye:us
*t:ayawá-sa => *diwás
Check it out. Perfectly regular using only Syncope,
Clipping and QAR. It's jampacked with explanatory
flavour.
> The meaning of the o-nominatives always involves
> iterative or resultative nuances, [...]
Yes, perhaps we should call it a perfective sense
then, but this aspect would still be under the
so-called 'stative' umbrella as I understand it which
opposes the 'active' durative-aorist. They are
seperated by different sets of personal endings,
afterall.
> The o-nominatives have week cases with *e, such as
> *wekW-ós or *ped-ós,
Which they should have, based on Paradigmatic
Resistance which avoids obscuring the weak form
of a stem in paradigms immediately following Syncope.
The rule strengthens pretonic *a to *e in these
inflected forms:
MIE eLIE
*wakW-s => *wa:kWs
*wakW-ása => *wekWás
*pat:-s => *pa:ds
*pat:-ása => *pedás
All taken care of, captain. And all without any
long vowels in Mid IE. That's gotta be a plus over-
and-above Jens' views.
> and there are traces of an archaic-looking
> acrostatic pattern: gen.sg. *dém-s, *nékWt-s,
> loc.pl. pé:d-su, etc., suggesting "Nartenoid"
> vocalism in pre-PIE.
I like that: "Nartenoid" :) Well, afaic, these forms
are post Syncope because they admittedly don't make
sense in my pre-Syncope universe. My theory currently
predicts *demós and **nekWtós, but doesn't the former
exist? I interpret these less common genitives as
evidence of a post-Syncope retraction of accent and
a zeroing of the de-stressed genitive suffix via
the existent ablaut processes of that stage in
question.
How do you interpret the origin of *pe:dsu then?
On *qep-/*qe:p-/*qo:p- being able to explain
traditionally written *kap-/*ke:p-/*ko:p- :
> Of course it does. I haven't said anything else.
No misunderstandings. I understand at this point that
you have the pattern of stating other people's
theories unbiasedly regardless of your own personal
views. I'm more biased to my own views :)
> How, then, do _you_ get a long *o: in such
> derivatives? If you merely label it as a "simple"
> lengthened o-grade you don't _explain_ the length.
No, Clipping in the nom.sg during Syncope does.
= gLeN
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com