--- In nostratic@..., Miguel Carrasquer Vidal <mcv@...> wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 23:02:55, "Glen Gordon" <glengordon01@...>
> wrote:

> Opposition between definite and indefinite adjectives is a regular
> feature of at least Slavic, Germanic and Tocharian.
> =======================
> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
> mcv@...


As far as I know, definite ajectives in Germanic, is marked by an
en/on-exstention of the stem, not e/o.

Glens explanation for the thematic wovels in verbs, I think make a
lot of sense.

However, both the explanations for the thematic wovels in nouns, I
find somewhat hard to believe of the following reason:

-In indoeuropean as it usually is reconstructed, the thematic
declention is very important, and it serves several purposes. It also
seem to be an strong connection between thematic stems (denoting
masculine gender) and a-stems (denoting feminine gender), where the a-
stems simply is a thematic stem furnished with a laryngeal suffixe.

-Both explanations does it neccessary to asume a very rapid
development of the thematic declention with all its features and

I simply do not think such a big thing could have developed so
rapidly from so small origins

Actually I have my own explanation for the thematic wovels in nouns.
As far as I have understood, many (perhaps all?) Steppe-nouns had
roots ending in wovels, conformant with wovel root endings in Uralic
and Altaic. Later on, as I have understood, those root wovels were
lost (as I think during the period where the quantitative ablaut

I simply think that for some reason not all nouns lost this wovel. I
think that some root end wovels were stressed, and that this stress
pattern protected them from being lost. Instead the sentral wovel of
the root was lost. These persistant root-end wovels then continues
into IE as thematic wovels. An example could be the noun wlqwos