Re: Verner-alternating Gmc. nouns

On 2008-12-21 01:32, tgpedersen wrote:

> If *tómos/*tomós pairs are made from verbal stems only, then their
> existence are not relevant to Schaffner's list, which consists almost
> exclusively of non-verbal stems.

A few are, e.g. *xanx/Ga- < *k^onk-o- (as for the underlying verb, see
Goth. ha:han, Ved. s'ankate, Hitt. ka:nki, Lat. cunctor), and there may
be others in the book. Unfortunately, I haven't got a copy of my own and
shall have to go to the library to check the details. I may be able to
do so on Tuesday, but if I don't find the time, the matter will have to
wait till after the Christmas break.

> In that message you call woghos and
> tomos deverbative nouns. I understand that as if you are saying *tomos
> is derived from a verbal stem. If you meant something else, then what?
> And if on the other hand you agree that *tómos/*tomós are derived from
> a verbal stem, do you have an example of a similar pair derived from a
> non-verbal stem?

The same apophonic immobility can be seen in words with PIE *a, like
*xaf/Bra- < *kapro- or *xanx/Gista- < *k^ank-ist(h2)-o-, which, even if
not PIE, are at any rate pre-Gmc., with external cognates in several
branches, and in those that are _certainly_ PIE, like *staþla-/*staðla
(> *stalla-) < *st(a)h2-tlom. In other words, it doesn't matter where
the *a's come from.

Piotr