Re: [tied] *es- or *h1es- ?

----- Original Message -----
From: "glen gordon" <glengordon01@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 4:39 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] *es- or *h1es- ?


> Patrick:
> > No PIE root may begin with a vowel.
>
> Incorrect because of the pronominal root *ns-.

***
Patrick:

No PIE root has no vowel.

***

>
> > Beyond that, you need a good source of information
> > like Beekes, Comparative Indo-European Linguistics.
>
> As do you, considering your above error.
>
>
> = gLeN

***
Patrick:

I have Beekes; and, differently from some, I have actually read it.

Perhaps Glen is unfamiliar with the form of notation Beekes employs: on page
209, he lists *Ns as a source of Gothic uns. The *n has a circle beneath it,
indicating vocalic *n. I normally use *N for *n with subcripted circle. I
know of no PIE root that contains only a consonant and a vocalic nasal or
liquid. I know of no PIE word that contains *N that is not a
stress-unaccented version of a word reconstructed with a vowel. But Beekes
is not saying that *Ns is the root, merely a stress-unaccented for a fuller
*nVs because, two lines below, he immediately lists OCS nas-6 which he
attributes to *no:s. If Glen thinks *no:s can be derived from *Ns, I would
be interested to see just how that would work.

***