Re: o-grade thoughts

From: tgpedersen
Message: 45957
Date: 2006-09-05

> It's not in Pokorny, if that's what you mean, no. But since
> I suspect that *bheH(i)- (I think I'll amend it to) is manifested
> in both Pokorny *bho:i- : *bh&i- : *bhi:- "sich fürchten" and
> Pokorny *bhei(&)-, *bhi:- "schlagen" , then one wouldn't expect it
> to be there.
> (And I would sorely like to find a way of deriving from it his
> *bha:-, *bho:-, *bh&- "glänzen, leuchten, scheinen" and *bha:-
> "sprechen", all as aspects of a physical unwellness, timor dei,
> connection from the other side kind of concept).
>

Jasonoff handles it something like this: Of many roots, different
languages have either e-, o-, or zero-grade of the root in the
present stem, *therefore* -> they might originally have been
hi-conjugation (traditionally: perfect forms).
Now here I'd add: root aorists are inflected like presents,
however: because of rules against consonants in auslaut, 2sg,
3sg lose their ending (Skt., Ch.Sl.) and even the consonants
in auslaut of the root (Ch.Sl.). Something like:
CVC-om
CV:
CV:
CVC-omV
CVC-etV
CVC-ont

So I thought: there's the long-vowel form! If someone tried to
append the locative -i suffix (traditional: hic-et-nunc -i) to
that, it'd be
CVC-om-i
CV:-i
CV:-i
CVC-omV-i
CVC-etV-i
CVC-ont-i

from which one can abstract the extended stem CV:-i, eg. if someone
tried to regularize the above with 'proper' endings

CVC-om-i
CV:-i-si
CV:-i-ti
CVC-omV-i (?)
CVC-ete-i (?)
CVC-ont-i

and regularized the root
either by generalizing the CV:- root
CV:-om-i
CV:-i-si
CV:-i-ti
CV:-omV-i (?)
CV:-ete-i (?)
CV:-ont-i

or with the CVC root restored
CVC-om-i
CVC-i-si
CVC-i-ti
CVC-omV-i (?)
CVC-ete-i (?)
CVC-ont-i

and wasn't satisfied and further generalized it:
either with the new stem CV:-i
CV:-i-om-i
CV:-i-si
CV:-i-ti
CV:-i-omV-i (?)
CV:-i-ete-i (?)
CV:-i-ont-i

or with the new stem CVC-i
CVC-i-om-i
CVC-i-si
CVC-i-ti
CVC-i-omV-i (?)
CVC-i-ete-i (?)
CVC-i-ont-i

which latter is, viola: Slavic -jo/i-, much more simple than
Jasonoff's detour over 1sg and the AHIHA -> AIHA rule.

Now does this mean that long vowel roots CVH(i)- might be from
another root CVC- with loss of the last C? I don't know yet.


Torsten