On 2006-01-19 01:05, Patrick Ryan wrote:
> The precise semantics of the
> 'be' and 'stand' elements still eludes me, but I'm still thinking :)
>
> Piotr
>
>
> ***
> Patrick:
>
> In my opinion, the likeliest explanation for the element -*is- in
> comparative and superlative construct is *yes-, 'indeed'; an affirmative
> particle.
>
> ***
Problems: (1) There is no other trace of such a particle (Eng. yes comes
from OE gese, gyse, gise, historically a combination of the affirmative
adverb <ge:(a)> with <si:e>, the subjunctive of 'to be'). (2) The funny
features of PIE adjective gradation (the full grade, the long -i:- of
Skt. -i:yas- and Gk. -i:o:n, the *-on- extension in Greek, Germanic and
perhaps Baltic) are not accounted for.
If the comparative and the superlative are not based directly on
adjectival stems but rather on related nouns, they are formations
parallel to Skt. bala-stHa- 'powerful, vigorous' (= 'in a position of
strength'), only more archaic.
Piotr