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

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

From: Piotr Gasiorowski

To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, April 23, 2006 2:47 AM

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

On 2006-04-22 22:54, Patrick Ryan wrote:

>     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's "somehow" evidence for the underlying _stem_ *we:kW-, but the
actual case forms contain *wo:kW-/*wokW- (in the strong cases) or *wekW-
(in the weak cases).

 

***

Patrick:

 

Sorry, but I cannot accept *wo:kW- is evidence for **we:kW- though, in my opinion, it most probably is evidence for an underlying *wekW-.

 

***

>     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).

Sorry, but I don't recognise a valid reconstruction in any of these, and
I don't even understand what you mean by "a thematically extended -*s
form". As far as I can see, there's nothing irregular about the attested
derivatives of the root *wekW-. They are all perfectly normal.

***

Patrick:

 

-*s, 'state' or 'quality'; -*é-s, thematic vowel + -*s.

 

***