Re: Slavic endings

> > > Why did unstressed *-os become -U in masculines, but
> > > become -o in neuters?
> >
> > Either, as Piotr suggested, the presence of oblique forms
> > in -es- triggered a special development of the NAsg. in -os,
> > or the -o of the s-stems does not continue PIE *-os, but
> > pronominal *-od.
> >
>
> Is it possible that PIE had a non-sigmatic nominative
> which survived only in Slavic? After all, the nom. -s
> in athematic inflections in many cases looks like it's
> been slapped on later. CF. also the Novgorod nominatives
> in -e. It would match the Fennic languages which became
> substrates to the early slavic ones, they have unmarked
> nominatives.

Why do we keep saying that n.nom.acc. is -o when it's both
-o and -e? Are those IE ablaut forms or something else? Is
the Novgorod m.nom. -e the same suffix, and if so, why
doesn't it alternate with -o?


Torsten