[tied] Re: PIE Word Formation Q&A (1)

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Mate Kapoviæ <mkapovic@...> wrote:

>
> > Alright, where do you see these archaisms?
>
> Well, vaca:(m.)s(i) for starters... There's more of course but I
> don't have the literature handy right now and I am not sure I can
> recollect all the instances by heart correctly. All the collectives
> with *-V:C should belong here though, for instance *wedo:r > Hitt.
> wida:r etc. The easiest way to explain *wedo:r is via earlier
> *wedorh2.

Such forms could also easily be from earlier e.g. *wédors, cf. *kwóns

> *kwó:n. The point is, I don't see how we have all of the facts just

yet.

> > That's not what I was asking, but thanks. Perhaps what I should
> > really ask is how the /s/ came between the /n/ and the /i/.
>
> Well, it's the old *-s from *wekWo:s. It's a synchronic rule in
> Sanskrit that these forms have to have a long vowel (here -a:-), a
> nasal (-m.- here or -n- in yuga:ni) and a final -i, if my memory
> serves me right. There's a nice little footnote about it in Sihler
> for instance.

IIRC, Sihler also mentions that such Sanskrit forms are rather
enigmatic and difficult to reconstruct for IE, which is my point.
Furthermore, how does the *s come to intrude between the *n and the
*i? That's what I'm asking here.

- Rob