[tied] Re: PIE i- and u-stems again

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer Vidal <miguelc@...>
wrote:

>
> On Sat, 10 Feb 2007 18:28:52 -0000, "tgpedersen"
> <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
>
> >--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer Vidal <miguelc@>
> >wrote:
> >>
> >> An analysis of the attested forms in Sanskrit, Greek,
> >> Armenian of these u-stem neuters reveals that they are in
> >> origin neuter n-stems (i.e. r/n-heteroclitics) composed with
> >> a suffix *-un- (final *-un > *-ur, unstressed *-un- = *-un-,
> >> stressed *-ún- > *-éu-). For instance:
> >
> >Stressed *-ún- > *-óu- is more phonetically believeable and matches
> >your data too.
>
> /o/ was a long vowel at the time ([o:]), and wouldn't have
> been reduced.

There's nothing to stop [o:] from coexisting with [ou]

> >> NA *g^á:n-un > *g^ónur
> >> G *g^a:n-ún-a:s > *g^en&wós > *g^énwos
> >> or, with early stress-shift:
> >> G > *g^enw&nós > *g^énunos
> >> L *g^a:n-ún-a > *g^enéw-i > *g^énui
> >> I *g^a:n-un-éh1 > *g^enunéh1 > *g^énuneh1
> >> du.
> >> NA *g^á:n-un-ih1 > *g^ónunih1 (cf. Skt. januni:, Toch.B
> >> keni:ne)
> >
> >Is this *-ur/*-un heteroclitic matched with similar *-ir/*-in and
> >*-ar/*-an heteroclitics?
>
> Sure. The *-[C]ar/*-[C]an heteroclitics are the normal
> -r/-n heteroclitics [after zero grade]. The *-[C]ir/*-[C]in
> heteroclitics are the i/n-stems of Sanskrit (áks.i, aks.nás
> "eye", ásthi, asthnás "bone", dádhi, dadhnás "curds",
> sákthi, sakthná: "thigh"). *potis (Toch. petso reflects the
> old nominative *pótyo:n) is probably a non-neuter member of
> this same group.
>
> >If so, is the *-r/*-n part detachable from the stem in *-u, *-i
> >and *-a?
>
> No. *-un- is a suffix. Suffixes are (C)VC(C).
>
> >How would you account for Latin pecus, pecoris and pecus, pecudis?
> >If your *-ur/*-un stem is like the usual heteroclitics, its
> >consonant would alternate with more than r/n
>
> The r/n alternation is simply the result of a soundlaw:
> n > r / _# (but n > n / m(V)_# ).

I know.

> There is an ancient alternation n ~ t (e.g. in the plural
> morpheme **-an ~ **-atV), which is not limited to PIE. This
> may be relevant to the connection between n/r-stems and
> s-stems, but I don't know how.

I think the road goes over *-nd-

> I can't do anything with pecus, pecudis

I've been wondering for some time if the prepostion etc *en (-> in) is
really an ending-less locative of the pronoun *i/y- (is, id), with the
-n preserved by its many suffixes, and meaning "in it". The use of it
as postposition would then correspond to similar uses in Finnish, if
the NP governed by it was once in the genitive, so that *kensto(s)-en"
meant "censum's, in its inside", ie. "in censo". Such a paradigm would
contain *-d (id), *-s (Gr. eis), *-n (in) and *-r (Dutch er). It would
be as allophonically diverse as one that covered the cattle word.


Here are two paradigms from Ersya Mordvin:

moda "earth"
xx indef def
sN moda moda-s´
pN moda-t

sAG moda-n´ moda-n´t´
sDAl moda-n´en´ moda-n´t´en´
sIne moda-so moda-sont´
sIll moda-s moda-n´t´en´
etc


vir´ "forest"
xx indef def
sN vir´ vir´-es´
pN vir´-t´

sAG vir´-en´ vir´-en´t´
sDAl vir´-n´en´ vir´-en´t´en´
sIne vir´-se vir´-sent´
sIll vir´-s vir´-en´t´en´
etc


The definite stem is built up on the sg stem extended with -(e)n,
which happens to be the sG suffix (just as -n is an adjective suffix
in IE), except in the Nom where the extension is -s. It looks somehow
similar, but putting that into rules will be difficult.
One thing is certain: the suffix would be -VC, thus fulfilling that
demand.

> >> Of course. This applies only in monosyllables:
> >> *tris > erir "twice",
> >> *dWis > erkir "thrice",
> >
> >Is this right?
>
> Yes.

PIE *tris "twice",
PIE *dWis "thrice"

??


Torsten