Re: xW/w (was: Lithuanian diphthongs)

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...> wrote:

>
> W dniu 2011-06-13 23:05, stlatos pisze:
> >


> > Why does * PL wógWH-mis.+ corr. to PBalt wógWH-n.is.+ and PGmc
> > wógWH-n.i-s.ón.+ > wogWH-n.à-s.on.+ ? Was there -mn- w/in the PIE
> > form, or was it, do I dare?, a compound?
> >


> Probably adj. *wogWH-n-o- ~ *wogWH-m-o- (*m and *n vary in o-grade
> derivatives of *-men- stems),

Then follow your logic. If G ókhe:ma showed * wógYHexYmn and deriv>> * wógYH-xY-mnós > * wógYH-xY-nós \ wógYH-xY-mós > OHG wagan ; OIr fén ; Li vez^ìmas (w opt. o>e by gYH , etc., as L genu: ; G gónu ),

(
The alt. xY/y seen in:

okhéo: = lead, okhetós = channel G; vahita- [shows xY>i; closed syl] S;

is due to xY>y between V:

*
wógYHexYè wógYH-xY-t*ó+
wógYHexYè wógYH-xY-t.ó+
wógYHeyè wógYH-xY-t.ó+

)

then the odd tone shared by vez^ìmas and * wogWH-mì-s.on.+ and shared m/n alt. point to a compound to expl. * wógWH-mis.+ \ wógWH-n.is.+ \ wógWH-n.i-s.n.+ as 'wagon driven by oxen > team of oxen > ox(en) w plow > plow' . The -w- moved from 'ox/bull' because it followed m , not allowed, forming * wówgYH-xY- > * wógWYH-xY-.


hence an i-stem noun by internal

> derivation. The adjective or the noun could be dialectally extended with
> *-s- (*wogWH-nos/-nes-, *wogWH-mis-)

What ev. is there for any w/out -s-? L vo:mis \ vo:mer makes original -is opt. analogic> -i+s .

> and Germanic transformed it into a
> weak noun.

You explained m/n alt. for widomo by PIE mn ; here there's m/n alt. but you explain the n-stem in Gmc as only Gmc. I think you either need to reevaluate your manner of evaluating ev. or admit that n-stems in Gmc don't nec. show anything about PIE.

> Folk-etymological influence of the 'wagon' word is possible
> here. One would expect an underlying neuter noun, *wegWH-mn./*ugWH-men-,
> but I'm not aware of its direct attestation anywhere.

There's no ev. of any *wegWH-; as you've already seen the need to equate it w *wegYH-, do so in its PIE origin.