Re: Balto-Slavic C-stems / long vowel endings

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "mandicdavid" <davidmandic@...> wrote:

>
> >
> > What have oxytone neuters to do with the verbal 1sg.?
> > The 1sg. did not have final -m in PIE, and it can't have had -m in
> > Balto-Slavic because that would have given Slavic -U, not -oN.
>
>
> How do you explain -y in present participles: bery...?
>
>
> > > Slavic vodá might be backformed as a
> > > singular (hence the mysterious f.) from the regular *vódy <-
> > *wódo:ns.
>
> That's more likely than *wodo:r > voda. Wouldn't o: be raised to u:
> then, cf. mati < má:te:r?

Isn't that what we want? *-o:ns -> *-u:Nh -> *-u: -> -y according to
Miguel's rules; that even works for your question above.

> The neuter ending -o comes from pronominal *-od. It was first
> transferred to the adjectives (also Lith. neuter adj. -a),
> then to nouns (not only oxytones: slo``vo is a.p. c, lê"to is a.p.
> a).

> It might also have come from -o, which appeared as an analogy to
> other neuter stems -u, -i etc.

Or as a regular sandhi variant of *-óm.


Torsten