--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, glen gordon <glengordon01@...> wrote:
>
>
> >> English: in the long, dark nights.
> >
> > dHlngHús westós nékWti.
> > "In the long and 'clothed' nights."
>
> Lars:
> > Is this IE before the split from Anatolian having no
> > special oblique endings for the plural? Wouldn't
> > kernel IE display something like *dHlngHúsu westósu
> > nékwtsu.
>
> Oh that's right. The word is animate, not inanimate
> (dunce cap for me) so therefore has a plural. Good
> eye. We should collaborate together and offer
> PIE Translation Services for a fee ;)
>
>
> > Or perhaps even in bit older stage
> > *dlngH&w west& nekwt-ambhi.
>
> I think that's too "old" for his purposes. I don't
> think he wanted pre-IE... yet :)
>
>
> = gLeN
Right. I was thinking of Late PIE. But it's interesting to find
whence these words arose! And thanks!
I've done a bit more, and I'll incorporate what's been suggested.
Snow covers the field.
Snow[NOM] field[ACC][Them?] cover-secondary present-3RD-SING[Athem]
SnéigWH-os h2eg'r-om stég-ti
Glen: snéigHWos xégrom stégeti
The first line I have since corrected - thank you for the correction
with the "i" on *stegeti. Just curious, though, why the "e" between
the "g" and the final "t" there? I'm checking Benjamin Fortson's
"Indo-European Language and Culture" and Michael Meier Brügger's
"Indo-European Lingustics", and they say that the form was *steg-ti.
Or is the word I'm seeking in another form than the athematic
3rd-person primary present?
Cold stars freeze the river into ice.
cold[ADJ][NOM] star-PL[NOM][likely Athem]
running-water/river[NOM-ACC.N][Athem] ice-[INST*]
freeze-3RD-PL[Primary/Present Active][Athem] .
gel-io-s h2sté:r-s h2ēp yeg-eh1 kreus-énti
gelios h2sté:rs h2ēp yegeh1 kreusénti
Glen: xstéres gHimnós sréwom yegodHénti.
"The stars of winter ice the river."
I prefer Glen's wording by far to my own. Again, the "e" before the
final "s" of "xstéres," is that because of a miscalculation on my part
or is it a matter of opinion among IE researchers?
Men are chilled and sad
man-PL be-3RD-PL chilled[NOUN][ACC] sad[NOUN][ACC]-AND [Men are the
chilled ones, the sad ones]
[?] h1s-énti oug-o-m [?] -kWe ,
Glen: wixro:s ?sénti geltós trstós kWe
First, the obvious: why the question-mark? Does it represent a glottal
stop? Secondly: Other than in the Romance languages and Latin, where
else is a word like *trstós found?
In the long, dark nights
long[ADJ][LOC PL] dark[ADJ][LOC PL] -AND night-[LOC PL][Athem]
dl.h1g-ó-yo nókWt-yo-su-kWe nókWt-su .
dl.h1góyo nókWtyosukWe nókWtsu .
Glen: dHlngHús westós nékWti.
"In the long and 'clothed' nights."
Clothed? I'm very confused by that word. And I'd read about agreement
between the adjectives and nouns - am I getting that agreement totally
wrong? Also, the idea of "during" or "in" - is that locative plural
for "nights"? Also, should there be a "kWe in this phrase for the
"and" sense?
When shall dark and cold depart?
[When] [shall] darkness chill-AND leave-3RD-PL
[?] [?] h1regWo-s oug-os-kWe leikW-.
Glen: kWo dínoi no:kWt géltu kWe likWt
"On what day does night and cold depart?"
Is there any reconstructable word for "when" in PIE? And is there a
future tense?
When shall ice melt into water?
[When] [shall] ice-[INTO?] water melt-[INTO?] (not sure where
to put the locative)
[?] [?] yeg- wódr./n-
Glen: kWo dínoi yégos wednéi text
Is the word "text" a computational mistake for some character or
something, or is the word actually teh2t?
When shall new spring come?
[When] [shall] new[ADJ][NOM] spring[NOM] [come]
[?] [?] néw-o-yo-s wesr-s [?]
Glen: kWo dínoi néwos wésr gWmt
Again, the "s"es - same question, is this a semantic mistake on my part?
When can I plow my field again?
[When] field[NOM] again[-]plow-1ST[FUTURE-DESIDERATIVE] (This case
is attested in Indo-Aryan, Balto-Slavic, and Celtic)
h2ég'r-os h2erh3-sye/o-mi (could be *-sye- or *-syo-)
Glen: kWo dínoi xégrom xérhWom
How does one include the word "again," while still including a future
tense?
I'm not trying to put down what you're saying. No- I'm just trying to
get a better grasp on it. I don't want to be going off on red herrings.