--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "dgkilday57" <dgkilday57@...> wrote:
>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "dgkilday57" <dgkilday57@> wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@> wrote:
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > > A VOS contruction in a SOV language? Hm.
> > >
> > > Old PIE, not PIE just before the diaspora.
> >
> > PIE was SOV. Are you saying 'Old PIE' was VOS? That's a highly
> unusual type of sequence.
>
> All six sequences are known, so nothing should be ruled out a
> priori.
All sequences having OS as a subsequences are extremely rare. Cases where such sequences are embedded in languages of other types would be rarer still.
> Voiced aspirates are unusual too, but we always seem to go back to
> them, pace Prokosch, Gamkrelidze-Ivanov, etc.
Erh. Ahem. Very self-consistent.
> > What's an 'active impersonal'?
> One which can take a direct object.
Don't they all? AFAIK they do in Finnish and Estonian. That's more or less equivalent to demanding the impersonal should exist for transitive verbs too.
> > Remember that we have to have a rule *-Vn# -> *-Vr# anyway,
> > because of the heteroclitic neuters. The -i suffix under my
> > proposal would not have to have the suspicious property of being
> > both a nominal and a verbal suffix, but be exclusively nominal,
> > in fact be only the locative ending -i, its seeming occurrence as
> > a verbal suffix being actually as the locative ending of a
> > (personalized) verbal noun.
>
> I think the heteroclites are better explained by suppletive
> Suffixwechsel, not a phonetic law.
I disagree.
> > I think -i developed after C (but was mechanically transferred to
> > the personalized ppp's in *-n,Wo, *-so, *to, as a locative
> > marker), and -r developed after V.
>
> I guess I joined the group too late for your exposition of */n,W/,
> and what it is actually reflected as in extant languages.
It's reflected as /m/, /n/ and /w/, possibly /x/ (xW?) before unvoiced stop; the exact rules I haven't figured out; many of the cases have to do with water and activities associated with that; in many cases I suspect the relevant words were loaned from a substrate, which makes formulating exact rules for the 'decay' of */n,W/ very difficult. Note this:
'un,a 'Strom; strömen' FU
Finn.
vuo 'Strom, Strombett',
vuota- 'lecken, leck sein, Wasser durchlassen, laufen, sickern; rinnen, fließen';
est. voo 'Strömung, Wellengang',
vooda- (vooan) 'lecken(intr.), laufen, triefen' |
lapp. (Lind.Öhrl.)
uwe, uvwe 'flumen placide manans, fluxus',
uvwete-, uwete- 'aquam accipere, perfluere (de navigiis)',
(T. I. Itk.: JSFOu. 32/3 : 57)
N uvve (Gen. uve) 'flumen placide labens, fluvius' |
ostj. (OL 118)
V oG, DN ow, O aw 'Strom', V oGa-, DN ow-, O aw- 'strömen' |
wog. (Kann., mitg. Liim.: MSFOu. 127:178) ow:
TJ ow s^is^ew, LU ow s^is^a: 'stromabwärts' (s^is^ 'Rücken'),
(Kann.Liim.: MSFOu. 134:14, 70, 92) KU P ow 'Strom',
So. ow- 'strömen',
(MSz.) N åw, åu 'Flut, Strom', åw- 'fließen'.
Nomen-Verbum.
Sam. jur. jiend?, jient? 'reißend; Wirbel', Jen. Ch. bieddu? 'reißende Stelle', twg. bua 'reißende Stelle im Fluß' und selk. B kü:n,e id. (Beitr. 290) können wegen des ursprünglichen anlautenden *w nicht hierher gestellt werden.'
Look familiar?
The question is then whether FU was the donor or some third language, I think the latter, since FU has this formally unrelated root too:
'uje- ~ oje- 'schwimmen' U
Finn. ui- 'schwimmen';
est. uju- (dial. oju- ,ojo-) |
lapp.
N vuoggjâ- -j- id.,
L vuodja-,
K (1708)
T vijji- (iø),
Kld. vu:jje-,
Not. vuojje- |
mord. EM uje- |
tscher. KB iä-, UB ija- |
wotj. S uj-, K uj- 'id., zu Wasser fahren, schiffen',
(Wichm.) G ujal- 'schwimmen',
K ûjasa vetl&^- 'kriechen, gleiten' |
syrj.
S (Wol.Réd.)
P uj-,
PO ùj- 'schwimmen (P PO);
waten (im Kote, Sumpf, in seichtem Wasser, im Wasser, durch den Fluß) (S)' |
ostj. (PD 2845) Ko. üj- 'schwimmen, kriechen',
(96) V ot´-, DN ut´-, O os´- 'schwimmen' |
wog.
(Kann. Mskr.) TJ KU oj-, P wuj-, So. uj-,
(Kann.: FUF 14:58, 59, 77) LU ujja:l-, ujj&l-, So. ujGal-|
ung. úsz- ||
sam.
jur. (44) Lj. n,ü-;
selk. (Donn. Mskr.) Ty. TaU u:-, Ta. Ke. uurn ,
(MSFOu. 122:319) Tur. u:rk- 'id., sich baden'.
Vgl. alt.:
ma.-tung. *uju- 'plavatI (o ptitse)': uju-kta-, un´ukta-,
gold. on´oan-.
Est. u und o sind möglicherweise Ableitungssuffixe,
ostj. t´, s´ (< *c´) und ung. sz verdunkelte Frequentativsuffixe.
Im Tscher. wurde das ursprüngliche *u oder *o unter dem Einfluß des folgenden j zu i.
Das Finn., Est. und Mord. weisen auf *u, das lapp., Wotj., Syrj. und eventuell das Tscher. auf *o; auf Grund der anderen Sprachen kann sowohl *u als auch *o angenommen werden.'
I would love to refer you to the relevant cybalist pages, but the archive index doesn't work for at least december last year. I asked in cybalist_admin the moderators to take up the matter with Yahoo three weeks ago, but there has been no reaction that I am aware of.
Torsten