Re: Sos-

From: dgkilday57
Message: 65152
Date: 2009-09-30

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Torsten" <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "dgkilday57" <dgkilday57@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Torsten" <tgpedersen@> wrote:
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > 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:-/´-i:-/-i:-´ > PPIE -éI-/´-i:-/-i-´
> > > PPPIE -ú:-/´-u:-/-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.
>
> In which model do you mean?

The /i:/ in your first stage becomes /eI/, /oI/, or /i/ in the last, depending on accent.

> > Can you explain Greek <tri:'bo:> 'I rub', 2nd aor. pass.
> > <etri'be:n> with short /i/?
>
> Greek is not my strong suit, but this one I think I can handle by means of another rule I proposed; see the discussion starting in
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/46106
> and
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/47212
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/46183
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/49523
> In casu: tri:b- is a cross between the forms occurring in 3sg *tréIb- and 3pl *trimb-´.

But this verb does not have nasalized forms in Greek. Note that <lambano:>, <manthano:>, ktl. have double nasalization in the whole present stem similar to those Hittite 3pl. forms.

> > Greek turns */ih2/ into /ia/ (feminines corresponding to Sanskrit
> > -i:) and */ih3/ into /io/ (<bios> 'life', originally a root-noun
> > *gWih3-s).

Duh! Forgot /w/, and the /b/ before /i/ is ... Aeolic? Borrowed into Attic-Ionic early enough to lose the /w/?

> I don't deny the existence of laryngeals.

I was just trying to show that <tri:bo:> hardly comes from *trihb-.

> > 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.

And yet hard to avoid, and the /i:/ is ancient if (Pre-)Greek <thri:ps> 'woodworm' is related the way I think it is.

> > > > 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.
>
> Let's just say it looks like a dimorphism. 'Cubism' looks like a dimorphism too, given other -isms, but that doesn't imply it's from OE.
>
> > 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-(?).
>
> Alternation -an-/-un- and it doesn't follow Verner? I'm getting suspicious.

'Hunger' does follow Verner, but both the oxytone and paroxytone have zero-grade. That is one reason why I am no longer convinced of a simple correlation between ablaut and proto-accent.

> A wild shot in the dark:
> http://www.angelfire.com/rant/tgpedersen/krn.html
> cf. Lith. kankà "torture"

If *kenk- is the correct root of 'hunger', then related. Or perhaps *kenk- was back-formed from *kn.-kr- from redupl. Old PIE *kar-kar-.

> > > > > > 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?
>
> -a- would shine through, and Pokorny would sift pre-ablauters from substraters. But that doesn't answer you question, of course.
>
> Perhaps we can estimate at least the distribution of /a/ vs. e/o/zero from their respective occurrence in eg the *d/tran,W- root in hydronyms, note Udolph's dicussion of the distribution of the roots *Drag- vs. *Dreg- in
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/61626
> if that root is IE at all; and besides it may just be the name in the language of the people using the rivers for transport, note the Dutch origin of hydronyms such as Kattegat, Skagerrak, North Sea (from Dutch-made charts).
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/58462
> bottom (but I stick to my semantics for it).

Kuhn's comments on the "Alteur." river-name problem are sound. Many of these are very likely pre-IE names which have been more or less remodelled to the IE "Muster". The situation is much more complex than Krahe, or neo-Kraheans like Kitson, have supposed.

> > > > 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.
>
> A solution like that in the *trib- case?

I think so, at least in part: retention of original */u:/, with /u/ in reduced grade after the model of "normal" Class II st. verbs, just as <etribe:n> has /i/ for reduced grade after the model of Greek verbs with /ei/ in full grade.

Of the five most common OE verbs of this type, <bru:can> is assigned by Pokorny to a long-vowel root *bhru:g-. The others are placed with "normal" roots having /eu/, but I am not convinced that all these placements are correct.

By the way, check out the distribution of 'brain'. A NWBlock loan??

DGK