Re: [tied] PIE Word Formation (2)

----- Original Message -----

From: Piotr Gasiorowski

To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 10:36 AM

Subject: [tied] PIE Word Formation (2)

<snip>

 

The tendency to use contrastive accent must have operated throughout the
history of PIE and into the early "dialectal" stages. Several
chronological layers can be discerned. To begin with the oldest, there
was a time when accent retraction to a formerly unaccented syllable
caused the appearance of a full vowel there, while the syllable that had
lost its accent was phonetically reduced. In particular, thematic *-o-
became *-u-. Let us imagine a root like *kret- (a real example, with the
approximate meaning of 'strengthen'. The addition of anaccented
adjectival suffix like *-ró- forms a verbal adjective: *krt-ró-
'strengthened', dissimilated to *krt-ó-. Accent retraction produces the
noun *krét-u-s 'being strong, power'. 

 

***

Patrick:

 

This is, by far, the most objectionable theorization I have seen on this list from Piotr, who is normally much more discriminating in his suggestions.

 

There is absolutely no proof and not even any persuasive indication that PIE *o _ever_ became PIE *u, under any circumstances: *o does not become *w; and *o does not become *u. This is pure fantasy.

 

This is no proof and not even any persuasive indication that PIE -*ró _ever_ was "dissimilated" to -*ó, under any circumstances. Dissimilate to *Ø??? Is that what "dissimilate" means??? Pure fantasy!

 

PIE -*u/*ú (from -*w) is an affix that is unrelated to -*ó (plurality) or -*ró (high degree); and has a totally different significance: it provides the idea of definite but limited repetition and successfully completed activity so that *kr.t-ú would primarily mean 'empowered, provided with power'.

 

***