Re: [tied] Re: Latin barba in disaccord with Grimm's Law?

--- Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:

> On Mon, 26 Jun 2006 22:23:04 -0700 (PDT), Sean
> Whalen
> <stlatos@...> wrote:
>
> >--- Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, 26 Jun 2006 12:02:42 -0700 (PDT), Sean
> >> Whalen
> >> <stlatos@...> wrote:
> >>
> >> >--- Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> No, I'm saying there is no o > a in Armenian.
> >>
> >> What there is in Armenian is a marked tendency to
> >> favour the
> >> oblique (weak) stem (cf. for instance barjr <
> >> *bherg^h- ~
> >> *bhr.g^h-, etc.):
> >
> > I think e>o after p/b/bh; for many IE languages.
> >This is too common for me to accept any other
> >explanation.
>
> There is no such development in Armenian (berem <
> *bher-,
> bekanem < *bheg-, etc.).

It's not regular in any IE language.

> Yes, I should have checked. In any case, the root
> is
> *h2eid- (Arm. ayt, aytnum, Lat. aemidus) ~ *h2oid-
> (Grk.
> oidos, oideo:, oidma) ~ *h2id- (Latv. idra).
>
> >> The Armenian verb is
> >> based on
> >> the e-grade root (or zero-grade) *h2eid- ~ *h2id-
> (>
> >> ayt-),
> >> LIV 258.
> >
> > I don't believe *h2o remains; instead *h2o > h2a.
>
> Certainly not.

There are forms that should have o-grade which show
a; so (I'm using x for h2):

*-oxor > *-axar (or -0, -i ending) > -ar L, -mai/-me:n
Gk

*xoiteye- > aitéo: "ask for" Gk

*xonx^.mo- > ánemos "wind" Gk

Since the changes in Latin for *oi can vary
depending on its environment I can't be sure if
aemidus would indicate *ai or *oi.

Do you think analogy or a new formation created
oidos not *ai-?

> > Are there any cases of PIE *oi you think made it
> >into Armenian?
>
> Of course: me:z "urine" < *moig^hos, for instance.

But e: (in me:j "middle", -e:r vs -ayr, -oyr < *uyr
third singular imperfect) comes from e or ei; there's
no guarantee there was o-grade here.

> >> >atamn vs odont- Gk
> >>
> >> Zero grade *&1dn.(t)-mn.t-ós > atamán (G). Cf.
> >Olsen
> >> 505.
> >
> > Some Mycenean forms may indicate *down.t- (I
> >reconstruct v not w) without original connection to
> >"eat". Why would h1 appear as a here?
>
> That's the standard Armenian reflex of a vocalized
> laryngeal.

But h1 (x^) in

* x^regWo-s > érebos, erek

* x^n^ewn. > ennéa, inn

and the Greek forms for "name" and "tooth" both have
variants with e- not o- (which seems like assimilation
to the following o).

> >> *&1noh3mn > anu(w)n (/m/ > /w/ before or after
> /o:/,
> >> Olsen
> >> 132). Or perhaps zero-grade *&1nh3mn. (= Slavic
> >> *inmin >
> >> jImeN)
> >
> > Where is this form from?
>
> Oblique (e.g. genitive *h1nh3mnós). The original
> paradigm
> was NA *h1nóh3mn., G *h1nh3mnós, L *h1nh3méni.

I meant jImeN; I've never seen that before (I just
checked to make sure the OCS form was imeN).





__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com