Re: [tied] Helios

From: Sean Whalen
Message: 45860
Date: 2006-08-28

--- Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...> wrote:

> On 2006-08-27 20:48, Sean Whalen wrote:
>
> > All of that is wrong. I don't want to get on
> > another tangent so I'll say: I already said there
> was
> > metathesis in 'sun', if you don't believe *sxulyos
> > existed then just assume *suxlyos > *su:lyas and a
> new
> > adj. was formed *su:lna- with delengthening in
> that
> > environment.
>
> I could accept the development of *h2u > u: in an
> open syllable in
> Indo-Iranian (presumably via laryngeal metathesis),

I'm sure the metathesis happened in PIE, or at least
not just in one branch:

> so that *sh2ul-ijo-
> > Skt. su:rya-. But I can't accept the gymnastics
> that follow
> (analogical *su:lna- in a language that has no
> reflex of *su:lijo-

*sxulyos was the gen. of *saxwel; forming an adj. from
the stem *sxul- is analogical only as *y was part of
the stem not an affix itself. Is there anything about
forming a new adj. in na- or turning an adj. to a noun
by adding n- you disagree with?

> just
> to force the point about the otherwise unattested
> difference between
> inherited *ul and syllabic *l. in Proto-Germanic,
> resulting in two
> different and differently assimilated lateral
> phonemes). I'm afraid we
> live in different solar systems ;-).

What am I doing that's so unusual? The derivation
for sunna from a word with *+na+n was made in part
because of *sulnika: > slUnIce giving evidence of a
more derived form with a nasal affix in a neighboring
branch. The only problem is that it looked like *ln
> nn instead of usual *ln>ll. Since I already had
l>L as an intermediate stage in some Ger. derivations
and *sxulyos there was no problem making my rules.

If you don't believe in PIE *ul not *wl. then just
assume *sxulyos was *sxu-lyos (or *sxu-los if you
don't believe in that original form for the gen.) but
adding adj. -na- forced a new syllabification creating
new *ul.


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