Re: [tied] PIE athematic neuters

On 2006-03-11 13:05, Miguel Carrasquer wrote:

> I don't follow. If there's nothing peculiar about the other
> cases in the neuters, there is nothing peculiar in the
> nom/acc. either, or there is something peculiar about both,
> both in neuters and non-neuters. There is no fundamental
> difference in Ablaut between a neuter like *dórur, *dérwos
> or an animate like *pó:ds/*pódm., *péds. The difference is,
> as you said, one of distribution: neuters are almost always
> static or amphidynamic, while "animates" occur in all types,
> the most common ones being proterodynamic or hysterodynamic
> (the *pod-/*ped-type would seem to be limited to root
> nouns?).

There is no obvious reason for the nominative lengthening in neuters (as
opposed to non-neuters), and yet it seems to occur there.
*k^e:r(d)/*k^r.d-ós appears to be like *dje:us/*diwos, but the extra
mora in the former (in the nom./acc.sg., but not in the other cases)
doesn't seem to be due to Szemerényi's lengthening; and if not, what is
it due to? The *h1we:su-s/*h1wosu type shows the difference clearly
(though both are static and share the "weak" (e-grade) case forms.

Piotr