From: Patrick Ryan
Message: 42054
Date: 2005-11-11
----- Original Message -----
From: "Miguel Carrasquer" <mcv@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 3:24 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] IIr 2nd Palatalisation (was: PIE voiceless aspirates)
> On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 01:57:21 -0600, Patrick Ryan
> <proto-language@...> wrote:
>
> [mcv:]
> >> <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
>
> *kWis
***
Patrick:
Oops!
***
>
> >>
> >> >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?
>
> karo:ti is somehow derived from kr.no:ti. The exact path is
> unclear. See LIV p. 392 for two possibilities.
***
Patrick:
Thank you for the reference.
But Allegroaussprache is a Dolorosoerklärung.
I am much more inclined to believe that *kWV in zero-grade, occasionally
became <ku> as I think may be the case with <kula-m> from *kWel-.
I certainly cannot accept that karoti derives from *kRnoti.
***
> >> >********************
> >> >
> >> >> >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?
>
> cé:s.t.ati, cyávate:, *ke:i- p. 539
> ca:s.a, 4. *kel- p. 547
> cr.táti, *kert p. 584
> có:pati, *kew@... p. 596
>
> >***
***
Patrick:
Thank you for these references.
First, there is nothing but imaginative thinking to connect ca:Sa to
*kel-(so-). It is of questionable value to prove anything. In addition,
every one of the other nine Old Indian derivations of this *kel- have <k>
(<kalká>). Nine *o- or zero-grades?
PIE roots are *CVC. Thus the root for cRtáti is *ker-; this is acknowledged
(almost) by Pokorny when he refers to 3. *(s)ker- under the *kert- listing.
In view of an attested kRNátti under this root, I suggest a prototype for
cRtáti would probably be better reconstructed as *skRtéti.
I do not think cópati can be very probative in view of kúpyati and kopáyati
from this root. Perhaps we are dealing with *skéupeti.
In view of their isolation, I think it is probable that céSTati and cyávate:
be referred to *skéisteti and *skyéwetei.
You are probably one of the few on the list who understands my great concern
over a "second" palatalization, and I appreciate your taking the time to
investigate the situation.
Obviously, I believe as you do, that PIE went through a reduced vowel stage.
It is my contention that IIr never went through a period in which early PIE
*a became *A (*e/ *o/ *Ø), leaving Old Indian free to utilize <o> for /au/
and <e> for /ai/.
Provisionally, it looks to me as if PIE *k remained <k> in Old Indian while
initial *sk became Old Indian <c>.
Early PIE *k^a simply became Old Indian <ç>.
It looks to me as if PIE *kW had two results in Old Indian: in a zero-grade
syllable: *k or *ku; in a full-grade syllable: <c>.
Obviously, these affricatizations are independent of the quality of the
following vowel.
I am, however, open to the possibility that <*kai> resulting in <*ke> may
have provoked <ce>.
***
<snip>