Re: [tied] Verner's Law (Germanic)

>
> As for its origin, one can only speculate. My guess is that the

ending

> was originally *-o:m < *-o-X-m, where *X is a pre-PIE plural marker
> (never mind its phonetic realisation for the moment) and *-m is the
> familiar acc. ending. The *-s is a later addition, marking plurality
> once again after the old marker had become obscured.

So the acc.pl. was originally similar to the gen.pl.? So was it used as
a kind of partitive (cf. negative statements in Baltic Fennic and
Slavic)?


Torsten