From: Miguel Carrasquer
Message: 43772
Date: 2006-03-11
>My current view (very tentative, but I'm still thinking) is that theI think some of them may be, especially the ones where
>*-r/n(t)- neuters are in fact old -nt- neuter participles (hitherto,
>essentially, a lost tribe since there is little other evidence of such a
>formation).
>> Now I too have been wondering about the peculiarities of theI don't follow. If there's nothing peculiar about the other
>> neuter in this respect, and I've had a suspicion for quite
>> some time now: what if it's not a peculiarity of the neuters
>> that they have heavy stems, but that it's a peculiarity of
>> heavy stems that they are neuter? The nominative and
>> accusative endings *-z and *-m are asyllabic and the only
>> ones to be so, and a soundlaw that drops them after a heavy
>> / long vowel syllable is not unthinkable.
>
>It seems to me that the quantitative anomaly in question is restricted
>to the nom./acc. of neuters; there's nothing funny about the other
>cases. In other words, it looks like a process which affects not the
>stem as such, but only an individual case form.