--- Piotr Gasiorowski <
gpiotr@...> wrote:
> On 2007-02-08 11:39, Sean Whalen wrote:
>
> > My derivation starts with im; if im>uw in
> > some environments as ju>ji, etc, this could
> > be a regularly inherited word.
>
> *ju > *ji is part of a more general rule (vowel
> fronting after *j).
> What's that got to do with *sUto?
Since final *um becomes U and not a nasal
vowel m must either disappear or go through
an intermediate non-N stage. Since *u:m >
U I thought that *u:w>uw was a likely stage
that would explain multiple odd changes.
Therefore as ju>ji so im>uw here or
something similar. Not an exact parallel,
just a similar change in the opposite
direction.
> > The exact
> > analogy depends on the order of various
> > changes, but here's a simple possibility:
> >
> > de-simt de-sim-tos simtom
> > de-sint de-sim-tos simto
> > de-sint de-sim-tus simto
> > de-sint de-sum-tus sumto
> > de-sint de-sim-tus sumto ana.
> > de-sint de-sim-tus suwto
> > etc.
>
> What's this *uw thing supposed to be? The first
> syllable of *sUto is
> light and contains a short reflex of short *u. If
> *uw is equivalent to
> *u:, the Common Slavic outcome would have been
> *syto. If it isn't, what
> do you need this *w for?
It's an intermediate stage. I already
showed a derivation with uw>u>U. I put
"etc." there to show the later stages
were the same as in the earlier derivation.
Since final *um becomes U and not a nasal
vowel m must either disappear or go through
an intermediate non-N stage.
If m changed into a non-nasal by u, the
likeliest choice would be w, and uw > u
later.
I can't prove this shows the regular
outcome of *imt but I do think sUto is
from Slavic; if so this is the only way
to make it work. It's fine if you don't
believe this, but I'm sticking with my
theory even though it requires analogy.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
http://new.mail.yahoo.com