Re: [tied] Re: PIE genitive plural *-o:m, a possible analysis

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

From: Piotr Gasiorowski

Sent: Saturday, April 22, 2006 1:46 PM

To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com

Subject: Re: [tied] Re: PIE genitive plural *-o:m, a possible analysis

 

On 2006-04-22 19:09, Patrick Ryan wrote:

>     Of course, *wé:kWs is _not_ what we see if Pokorny is to be
>     reliable.

We see *wo:kW-s (Lat. vox, RV va:c-, TB wek, Gk. acc.sg. opa < *wokW-m.,
etc.

***

Patrick:

This was, of course, my point. Sorry I could not transmit it properly.

To say it another way, there appears to be no evidence of *wé:kW-s;

or are you saying that *wó:kW-s is somehow evidence for *wé:kW-s???

***

>     It is rather *wékWos (note: short *e!).

This is an -es-stem (nom./acc. *wékW-os, gen. *wékW-es-e/os ...).

***

Patrick:

I think it is clear and you might agree that some of the irregularities with this root have to do with the co-existence of a regular singular. *wékW-s/*wékW-o-s, and a thematically extended -*s form, *wokW-é(:)-s(-s).

***

>     Do you know of a language displaying such a singular?

Gk. épos, RV vácas-, Av. vac^ah-.
 

***

Patrick:

Of course, I meant the *wé:kWs Rob put forward as singular.

Why, then, not é:???

***