Re: [tied] Re: PIE comparative

On Fri, 13 Jan 2006 10:14:44 +0100, Piotr Gasiorowski
<gpiotr@...> wrote:

>On 2006-01-13 00:51, Miguel Carrasquer wrote:
>
>> It's still fishy that -ro- is dropped in the comparative,
>> same as it is dropped in compounds.
>
>Another strange thing is the accented full vocalism of the comparative.
>One possible solution: the comparative element was originally *-h1es-,
>forming a quasi-compound with the vr.ddhied (substantivised?) adjective,
>so that from *h2ug-ró- 'big' we'd get something like *h2éugro- + -h1es-
> > *h2áugi-(h1)o:s (applying the normal rules of composition),
>reanalysed as *h2áug-(i)jo:s (Sk. óji:yas-, Av. aojiiah-).

And then this -i- from -ro-/-u- and presumably i-stem
adjectives was subsequently transferred to the others?

>This *h1es-
>could be a root noun corresponding to *h1es-ti, in which case the
>etymological meaning of the compound would have been something like
>'enjoying the state of bigness' (e.g. being big relative to other things).

Sounds possible, although I can't think offhand of a
comparable comparative formation in another language.

=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...