Re: Sos-

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Torsten" <tgpedersen@...> wrote:

>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "dgkilday57" <dgkilday57@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Torsten" <tgpedersen@> wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "dgkilday57" <dgkilday57@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > [...]
> > > >
> > > > I have a copy of that paper, which I should probably revisit.
> > > > I agree the Old PIE thematic vowel was */a/, and I believe this
> > > > was preserved as */a/ in later PIE in heavy syllables in
> > > > non-verbal forms. For example Lat. <falx> 'sickle', Sicel
> > > > <zagkle:>, Liguro-Latin <daculum>, Gallo-Rom. dial. <dal>,
> > > > <daille>, etc. (by dissimilation from *dalklom vel sim.) have
> > > > what I regard as original /a/ in the noun *dHalgH-s,
> > > > *dHalgH-os, etc. corresponding to the verbal root *dHelgH-.
> >
> > Very poor example on my part since it depends on poorly attested
> > Sicel and Ligurian. A better one is *da'k^ru-/*dak^ro'- 'tear'.
> >
> > > I hadn't thought of that, but it makes a lot of sense.
> > > This is what I thought happened to cause ablauting paradigms:
> > >
> > > PPPIE *a: > PPIE -é:-/´-o:-/-Ø-´ > PIE -é-/´-o(:)-/-Ø-´
> > > PPPIE *i: > PPIE -éI-/´-i:-/-i-´ > PIE -éI-/´-oI-/-i-´
> > > PPPIE *u: > PPIE -óU-/´-u:-/-u-´ > PIE -éU-/´-oU-/-u-´
> > >
> > > where the last stage is generalization from stems in /a/ in order
> > > to achieve ablauting paradigms (under Semitic influence, as
> > > claimed by Vennemann?). Short /a/ would survive such changes.
> >
> > Yes. I have no satisfactory theory of ablaut (since there is
> > remodelling all over the place in attested languages), but I doubt
> > that we need to posit shifting from one type of accent to another.
> > The actual PIE accent was complex, as hinted by the way the
> > Rig-Veda represents it.
>
> I must have explained myself badly. I am not positing accent type shifting, only showing what I think happened to the 3 PPPIE vowels /a/, /i/ and /u/ in tonic, post-tonic and pre-tonic position. Mayby I should write it like this:
>
> PPPIE -á:-/´-a:-/-a:-´ > PPIE -é:-/´-o:-/-Ø-´
> PPPIE -í:-/´-u:-/-i:-´ > PPIE -éI-/´-i:-/-i-´
> PPPIE -ú:-/´-i:-/-u:-´ > PPIE -óU-/´-u:-/-u-´
>
> and then, by analogy
>
> PPIE -é:-/´-o:-/-Ø-´ > PIE -é-/´-o(:)-/-Ø-´
> PPIE -éI-/´-i:-/-i-´ > PIE -éI-/´-oI-/-i-´
> PPIE -óU-/´-u:-/-u-´ > PIE -éU-/´-oU-/-u-´
>
> (sorry for all the P's, I needed three stages)

No original */i:/ survives. Can you explain Greek <tri:'bo:> 'I rub', 2nd aor. pass. <etri'be:n> with short /i/? Greek turns */ih2/ into /ia/ (feminines corresponding to Sanskrit -i:) and */ih3/ into /io/ (<bios> 'life', originally a root-noun *gWih3-s).

I can only explain this by assuming survival of orig. /i:/, with reduced grade in the aor. pass. by analogy after verbs with full grade in /ei/. Not very satisfactory.

> > Vennemann makes a big deal about Insular Celtic being VSO like
> > Semitic. Lehmann has argued that when a lot of non-natives learn a
> > language, it tends to become SVO. I see no plausible way that IC
> > could have acquired VSO from Semitic. Anything but SVO is likely
> > to have developed independently.
>
> Actually my belief that some Semitic language must have influenced especially the Norther IE languages comes not from Vennemann, but from Möller and the numerous cognates he found, which look more like loans to me. The one book I've finished proofreading my OCR copy of is his 'Vergleichendes indogermanisch-semitisches Wörterbuch'. I could e-mail you a .pdf copy if you're interested.

Yes, I'm interested.

> > My new strategy is to address one word at a time. I find 'hunger'
> > very important.
>
> Me too. As a matter of fact I'm rather peckish now. Erh, which word were you thinking of?

Gothic <hu:hrus>, Gmc. *hun,hruz, beside OHG <hungar> (/a/-stem, sometimes /u/-stem) and the rest, Gmc. *hun,graz, implying Proto-Gmc. (before the shifts) *kn.'kru-, *kn.kro'-. This is like *da'k^ru-, *dak^ro'- 'tear' (again Gmc. has both, and the /a/-stem tends to get contaminated with the /u/-stem). To me this looks like an archaic PIE dimorphism, so I would argue against 'hunger' being a loan from outside IE. I haven't decided whether 'hunger' represents *kenk- as the EWbb. say, or a reduplicated formation like Grk. <ka'khrus> or <de'ndron>, from *k(^)er-(?).

> > > > And while I may not be able to disprove the notion of ablauting
> > > > PIE-speakers overrunning earlier non-ablauting speakers, I find
> > > > it hard to believe that the same scenario occurred exactly the
> > > > same way in different areas,
> > >
> > > AFAI can see, all we need to assume to make that scenario work is
> > > that at a certain time the hearth of the nomad attacks developed
> > > ablaut.
> > >
> > > > and that the pre-IE substrate was always insulated from the
> > > > ablauting Hochsprache by this Niedersprache.
> > >
> > > ?? Who said that?
> >
> > It would follow from the scenario you suggested, since the
> > ablauting nomads would not directly conquer any non-IE-speakers,
> > only non-ablauting IE-speakers who had already absorbed the
> > substraters.
>
> Not necessarily, they might have left some 'bald spots' where non-IE speakers survived, only to be wiped out by the ablauters.

Can we identify any bald spots, or would later leveling have acted like Rogaine?

> > The real problem here is that the words with /a/ seldom show the
> > "upper-class" variants with /e/ and /o/.
>
> Class VI 'draw' vs. class I 'drive', perhaps (all of class VI strong verbs are best explained as PPGmc -a-/-a:-/-a:-/-a- >
> PGmc -a-/-o:-/-o:-/-a-), Engl. grab vs OIc grípa, Engl. wag vs. OIc víkja "move"? Futher the OIc. class III verb exceptions gjalda "pay", gjalla "shout", hjálpa "help", skjálfa "tremble", skjalla "scold" with present root vowel /a(:)/ for /i/ (< PIE -é- before R). Other than that note the alternation -eu-/-u:- in most of the class II verbs vs. OE scu:fan, OHG su:fan; that alternation is of the same PIE/PPIE type as the -a-/-e- you were looking for. Note how large the -u:- subclass is in Dutch, as expected, I'm not convinced it grew later.
>
> Note also that some of the class II -u:C- subclass have -uCC- geminated counterparts: OHG su:f-, Engl. sup, sip, Schrijver's *dubb- etc, Sw class III dimpa, damp,
> http://ordnet.dk/ods/opslag?id=437209
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanic_strong_verb

I can't give a quick answer to the <scu:fan> business, or the geminates.

DGK