Re: [tied] Latin suffix -klo- > -culus, origin?

----- Original Message -----
From: "Sean Whalen" <stlatos@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2006 4:17 PM
Subject: [tied] Latin suffix -klo- > -culus, origin?


>
>
> --- "Joao S. Lopes" <josimo70@...> wrote:
>
> > What's the origin of -k- in diminutive suffix -culus
> > (<*-klo-)?
>
> There were (at least) two diminutive suffixes in
> PIE and Latin created double-forms when it "sounded
> right" apparently.
>
> -lo-s
>
> -ko-s
>
> as in:
>
> yuwen- "young"
> yuvan- "young" Sanskrit, Avestan
> iuvenis "young" Latin
>
> yuw_nkó-s
> yaouank "young" Breton
> jung "young" German
> iuvencus "steer" [<*young (bull)] Latin

***
Patrick:

Yes, at some stage certainly.

But, I think, at origin -*lo is a 'deprecative' rather than a 'diminutive'
per se.

In earliest PIE, I would expect ANIMAL + -*lo to be a 'runt'; ANIMAL + *ko
to be a 'young ANIMAL'.

Also, probably -*lo as a pint-sized version of a larger ANIMAL.

Then as now, bigger was better.

***