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

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

> > Then again, who's to say that they're necessarily collectives?
>
> Sure, they could also be instrumentals, verbs, prepositions,
> anything... They *are* collectives (or neuter plurals). That's not
> my opinion. That's a fact. Look it up in any handbook...

Alright, I will. In the meantime, however, how much support is there
for that analysis in the attested descendant languages?

> > You did not explain to me *how* the presumably inherited *s split
> > the apparent *-ni ending in two. How do you think it happened
> > (assuming for the moment, that it did)? Metathesis? Analogy?
> > What?
>
> Analogy & mixing of the two endings.

What is this "mixing" of which you speak? Languages (better, speakers
of languages) don't throw things together haphazardly.

- Rob