Re: [tied] PIE suffix *-ro - 'similar-with'

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jens Elmegård Rasmussen" <elme@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, January 06, 2006 6:16 AM
Subject: Re: [tied] PIE suffix *-ro - 'similar-with'


> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@...>
> wrote:
>
> > Actually, stems
> > like *wed-r/n-, *pet-r/n-, etc., may themselves be substantivised old
> > neuter participles (like **pet-nt 'flying, that which flies' -->
> > 'feather, wing')
>
> That is really ingenious. Functionally, one may wonder if the
> connection is even deeper: If re:x and regens mean pretty much the
> same, it is perhaps rather the "individualizing" function of the n(t)-
> suffix that may here be extended to include also the r-allomorph. From
> collectives, the suffix denotes a single particular manifestation,
> sometimes directly a singulative; and from animates it denotes the
> particular one which the speaker has in mind. It seems to come close
> to a definite article.
>
> Jens

***
Patrick:

I do not think re:x and regens mean "pretty much the same'.

The best verbal connection we can make for re:x is 'to be a king', which
includes many more aspects than only 'ruling'.

regens arbitrarily selects among those many functions and pinpoints 'rule' -
some might argue the most important one.

I can see no "individualizing" component in the -*nt- suffix.

What shocked me, after I had been regarding -*n as an individualizing suffix
for many years, was the necessity of recognizing and reconstructing a
second -*n as a collective - and believe me, folks, I fought hard against
making this assignment.

In the sad state PIE is in, it is formally next to impossible to separate
the formal manifestations of each by the forms we actually find - somewhat
like -*ro and -*ró.

-*nt typically is attached to form durative ("present/imperfect")
participles which suggests semantically if not apparently formally, this
collective.

***