Re: [tied] Re: Greek and Sanskrit neuter plural and related questio

--- In cybalist@... s.com, Andrew Jarrette <anjarrette@ ...> wrote:

> And if the Latin vowel [final -a in nominative] was always short,

why does it remain

> as <-e> in French while other short unstressed vowels were lost in
> French (and Catalan, Provencal)?

In French, the formerly long unstressed vowels were also lost. It
seems to be a matter of quality - only the lowest of the unstressed
vowels survived. (It's a bit more complicated than simply losing the
unstressed vowels, but that;s the simples way of summmarising what
happened.)

> 2. What is the origin of the <n> that precedes the genitive

plural ending in Sanskrit (e.g. <-a:na:m)? Is it transferred from the
n-stems?

That's the textbook answer. And -:na:m is clearer to add to a vowel stem.

Richard.
_____________

Thanks for confirming my suspicions on both topics.  I guess you don't have any answers for my other questions on that message.  Is there anyone else who might care to try?  Those Greek o-stem neuter plurals in <-a> seem exceptional, and I would like to know how original they are.

Andrew