Re: [tied] IIr 2nd Palatalisation (was: PIE voiceless aspirates)

----- Original Message -----
From: "Miguel Carrasquer" <mcv@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 1:28 AM
Subject: Re: [tied] IIr 2nd Palatalisation (was: PIE voiceless aspirates)


> On Wed, 09 Nov 2005 18:26:09 -0600, Patrick Ryan
> <proto-language@...> wrote:
>
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Miguel Carrasquer" <mcv@...>
> >To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
> >Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 1:30 AM
> >Subject: Re: [tied] IIr 2nd Palatalisation (was: PIE voiceless aspirates)
> >
> >
> >> On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 20:02:57 -0600, Patrick Ryan
> >> <proto-language@...> wrote:
> >
> ><snip>
> >
> >> >PIE *kw regularly produces OI <c>;
> >>
> >> No. It regularly produces OI <k>. Before front vowels and
> >> /j/ this was palatalized to <c>.
> >
> >***
> >Patrick:
> >
> >First, to keep this discussion within manageable proportions, let us, for
> >the moment at least, look only at _initials_.
> >
> >The only forms I find in Pokorny with OI <k> for PIE *kW are:
> >
> >ka:çate:, *kWek^-, *kWok^[?];
> > kula-m, *kWel-;
> >karo:ti, *kWer-;
> >ka-H, kWo-s;
> >ki-H-, *kWei-s, *kWoi-s[?];
> > kri:Na:ti,*kWrei-;
> > kRmi-, *kWrmi-;
> > kSap, *kWsep-;
> >ka:s-, *kWa:s-.
> >
> >Presumably, you would explain these as instances of:
> >
> >zero-grade: kula-m; kri:Na:ti; kRmi-; kSap
> >presumably *o-grade: ka:çate, ka-H, ki-H
>
> <kis> obviously can't be o-grade. It's an irregular form
> without palatalization (analogical after <kas>, and other
> pronouns with -i-/-o- alternation)

***
Patrick:

I guess you mean PIE *ki-s, so this would be zero-grade, also.

***

>
> >before *a: (*aH) - ka:s-
> >
> >When I see imperative kuru, I suspect that karo:ti may be the result of
> >zero-grade as well: *kWréuti > *k(u)róti > *k-a-róti
> >
> >Is that basically how you see it?


***
Patrick:

You did not comment on karoti above. Could you please?

***


> >
> >********************
> >
> >> >PIE *k produces OI <k>;
> >>
> >> Which was palatalized to <c> before front vowels and /j/.
> >
> >I have gone through the *k section in Pokorny for initials, and can find
> >only
> >
> >candati, *(s)kendeti (metathesized from *(s)ked-n-)
> >camara, *kem-
>
> You missed a few: cé:s,t,ati, cyávate:, ca:s.a, có:pati,
> perhaps more.

***
Patrick:

I am still unable to find these forms in Pokorny. Could you please supply
the PIE forms?

***

> >
> >Of course. I am used to writing <S> for <s> (from the time that esh could
> >not easily be inserted into email)
>
> There are two eshes in Sanskrit: <s'> and <s.>.

***
Patrick:

How totally novel to call two letters by the same name!

I thought <s.> was a retroflex. Am I wrong?

***

> >so used <S> for Pokorny's <s'> and
> >Whitney's <ç>. If this sound is, in origin, truly a palatal sibilant, we
> >should expect PIE *se/*sy to be reflected in Old Indian as <S> but, no
> >luck,
> >there. In view of that and its use in Old Indian to reflect PIE *k^, I
> >suspect that it was originally /ç/ rather than /s/, and am adopting the
> >practice of writing it <ç>.
>
> It's old fashioned.

***
Patrick:

Is that so bad?

***

>
> =======================
> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
> mcv@...
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>