Re: [tied] Re: PIE Word Formation (2)

On 2006-04-03 17:45, Rob wrote:

> Hmm. With all due respect, I fail to see how a full vowel could
> reappear after it had been lost. Perhaps this is shortsightedness on
> my part, however -- if so, please let me know.

It was unaccented, perhaps qualitatively reduced to some kind of schwa,
but not yet lost completely. *per-tó- ([p&r-tó-]?) --> *pér-to- > *pér-tu-.

>> 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-.
>
> To me, this does not necessarily follow. Could it be possible, at
> least, for the form in question to derive from *krt-ó-? Obviously,
> the *-tó- participle cannot be used here, for we would then see
> *krstó- in IE outside of Indo-Iranian.

I prefer the *-ró- solution, since it involves forms whose structure I
can understand. I don't know what kind of thing *krt-ó- would be.

> How likely do you think it is that the speakers would be aware of the
> "underlying vocalism of the root"?

I mean they would have known where the vowel should be inserted. One
obvious possibility (see above) is that the vowel slot wasn't quite
empty yet, so that the potential zero grades *kr&t- and *k&rt- were not
homophonous, though eventually they merged as *kr.t-.

>> More recently, a similar scenario was re-enacted. From the root noun
>> *djeu- 'the bright sky, heaven' it's possible to derive thematic
>> *diw-ó- 'belonging to heaven, celestial', and then (on the analogy
>> of nouns like *krétu-) *déiw-o-s 'celestial being, deity'. Here the
>> vowel was inserted in the _wrong_ place, since the weak grade *diw-,
>> with the unstressed vowel reduced to zero, had become ambiguous. PIE
>> speakers had the same difficulty with other *CREC roots, which often
>> developed secondary full grades of the form *CERC. Note also that
>> the post-tonic reduction of the thematic vowel was no longer
>> obligatory at the stage in question. However, qualitative ablaut was
>> still productive, so when a new adjective of belonging was formed
>> from *déiw-o-s, it took the form of *[deiwo-]-ó- --> *diwi-ó-
>> 'belonging to the gods, divine, heavenly' (Skt. divyá-, Gk. di^os <
>> *diwios). Still later, another contrastive accent shift produced
>> another adjective without causing any segmental effects: *deiw-ó-
>> 'divine'.
>
> I'm afraid I cannot respond to this effectively without more
> information. If I may ask, where are the different forms attested?

The sequence is hypothetical, but the various forms are rather
well-known. I have no direct evidence for an original contrast between
older *déiw-o- and zero-derived *deiw-ó-, but I can't think of a better
way of accounting for the latter (RV devá-). Old Indic went even further
in multiplying derived forms: RV devyá- 'divine power' (derived from
<devá-> and vr.ddhied <dáivya> 'divine, typical of the gods' (with yet
another accent shift!).

Piotr