From: C. Darwin Goranson
Message: 43438
Date: 2006-02-15
--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Mate Kapovi?<mkapovic@...> wrote:
Casey: > >"I'd like to know is what he's saying is considered to be sensible or
> >not. Such as the feminine *-eh2 and *-ih2 being posissive suffixes
> >originally.<<
> I am forwarding Matasovic's message:
>
> Ranko Matasovic wrote:
> <Just to clarify what I am saying in "Gender in IE": there was a
> possessive <suffix *-ih2 and it is one of the sources of the feminine
> motion suffix *-<ih2; there was never a possessive suffix *-eh2, but the
> feminine motion <suffix *-eh2 is partly derived from the early PIE
> collective in *-eh2
> <(which is also the origin of the late PIE Nom-Acc pl. of the neuter
> <thematic stems).
>
> Mate
>
Er, Mate, could you explain what the "collective" is? I was a little confused about that
in Mr. Matasovic's book.
Also, tell him that I'm very interested by the proposed root-word for "badger" that he
puts forth. It seems somehow like to *tetk^on ("the maker"). From whence could
*tok^sos come from otherwise, and what might the original meaning have signified?