Re: [tied] tt/st/ss

From: Sean Whalen
Message: 48838
Date: 2007-06-03

--- In, Sean Whalen
<stlatos@...> wrote:

> I recently said:
> --- stlatos <stlatos@...> wrote:
> > --- In, "tgpedersen"
> > <tgpedersen@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Burrow: The Sanskrit Language, p 90
> >
> > > and on the other hand some ancient forms
> > > testifying to the existence of z instead of d as
> > in Iranian : dehí
> > > impv. 'give' beside daddhí, cf. Av. dazdi, and
> > dhehí 'put', both
> > > with e out of earlier az according to the rule
> > below. Either
> > > this is a case
> > > of dialectal divergence, or the type dehí (<
> > dazdhí) represents the
> > > regular phonetical treatment which has been
> > replaced in the majority
> > > of cases by new analogical formations.
> > > "

This theory, *dazdhí > dehí, which seems certain to
me, is the main reason I've said x(),>0 between dental
obstruents then d>z/_$T. Any explanation of t/s d/z
alternations must take this word into account, either
taking d>z as a possibility, or explaining it away.

The only argument I've ever seen against *z was by
Andrew Sihler, and it's not convincing at all. Now I
see there's a new book:

Hill, Eugen. Untersuchungen zum inneren Sandhi des
Indogermanischen: Der Zusammenstoß von Dentalplosiven
im Indoiranischen, Germanischen, Italischen und
Keltischen. Münchner Forschungen zur historischen
Sprachwissenschaft 1. Bremen: Hempen Verlag, 2003. 352
pp. [This monograph, originally a Munich dissertation,
discusses the development of DP + DP (DP =
Dentalplosiv, dental plosive) in Indo-European
languages. The main focus is on Indo-Iranian, Italic,
Germanic, and Celtic. Hill largely maintains the
traditional views that were already outlined in
Brugmann’s Grundriß: *-tt- was realized as /-tst-/ in
Indo-European and is manifested in this shape in
Anatolian; Sanskrit -tt- is due to the regular loss of
-s- in interconsonantal position; -ss- is the regular
reflex of DP + DP in Italic, Germanic, and Celtic. The
strength of Hill’s book lies in the detailed analysis
of apparent exceptions to the main rules. —Alfred

Does anyone know how he explains dehí, dhatté,
dhi:ks.ate, hyrst, wrist, caestus, come:stus, etc.?
Not to mention that in Iranian the same changes occur
after x,>0, so dentals that couldn't be affricates in
PIE even by this theory still cause the same changes
as in original clusters.

Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story. Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games.