From: Patrick Ryan
Message: 54363
Date: 2008-03-01
----- Original Message -----
From: "alexandru_mg3" <alexandru_mg3@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, February 29, 2008 7:29 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] PIE meaning of the Germanic dental preterit
--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Ryan" <proto-language@...>
wrote:
>
> Thanks, Piotr.
>
> Locative looks like a real possibility to me.
>
> Perhaps you can answer something.
>
> Would IE *bh&i- result in Lithuanian <bai->?
>
>
> Patrick
Patrick, "the haplology' to explain the Germanic weak preterite
(with all his issues "in sg. happened in pl. not happened": like a
hocus-pocus) is a much much better idea than the 'locative-one'
***
When have I addressed the "weak-preterite" problem?
When have I addressed the "haplology" problem?
Why are you mixing this into what _we_ are discussing?
Piotr's idea to explain *k^red- as a locative of full-grade *k^erd- and
zero-grade *k^Rd- is an excellent solution to the form.
You have done nothing to explain it at all that I can see.
***
1. Why you don't ask him directly if k^red-dHeh1 is a noun like *mn.s-
dHeh1 or not?
2. Why you don't ask him directly why 'we don't have a locative' in
*mn.s-dHeh1 too (sic!)
3. However I cannot imagine that he can say that *bai- in Lithuanian
can be from from an unexisting bHhi-
Marius
***
I would not ask him because I know the answer to #1, and question #2 is
totally irrelevant.
It really does not matter what his answer to #3 is.
If *bh&i- can result in Lithuanian <bai->, fine.
But if it cannot, then reduced grade *bhoi- from *bho:i- will also work.
Patrick