[tied] Re: o-grade thoughts

> > Probably, and then ablaut came around.
>
> A reduplication is a kind of compound (of a lexical stem
> with itself). To what extent word-internal ablaut rules affect
> the structure depends on how far the compound structure has
> been obscured. Something like *g^í-g^n-e-ti shows all the
> normal ablaut reductions, but is still recognisable as a
> reduplication. An intensive present like *gWH(e)n-gWHón-ti is
> more compound-like and has, accordingly, less reduction.

And therefore both vowels of Ce-CoC- *must* have survived the
ablaut formation process? I'm a nice person, so I won't call
other people's opinion 'preconceived'.

> >>> Except for the plural of perf. or iteratives (OHG bebo:n =
> >>> contract muscles in fear several times).
> >> That's iterativity again, not plurality.
> >
> > That's misunderstanding again.
>
> On whose part?

I don't think I've misunderstood myself. That eliminates one
candidate.

> > With this scheme, your -ei- would not stick out against an
> > expected -oi-, since it would be -ei- that was expected.
>
> In all other cases the active perfect participle is formed from
> the same stem as the finite verb; that's what makes
> *wéid-wo:ts exceptional.

As I said, in my ablaut scheme, -ei- is to be expected. You'd have
to knock that over first.


Torsten