## Re: [tied] Vrddhi in sigmatic aorist

Expand Messages
• ... I don t think you re alone. I find Szemerenyi s explanation for the long vowel very odd. If the vowel length were simply from the insertion of -s- after
Message 1 of 15 , Oct 31 12:35 PM
> I still haven't got those damn aorist figured out yet...

I don't think you're alone. I find Szemerenyi's explanation for the long
vowel very odd. If the vowel length were simply from the insertion of -s-
after a resonant, we would expect Sanskrit stems in -i to produce a
long -i:s in the aorist, but they don't, they give us -ais- / -es. Likewise
stems in -u give -aus- /-os. (These of course are long and short a + i,
long and short a + u in Skt) Examples:
aorist 4: anaisi:t, nesati

stem pru: = flow
aorist 4 prostha:s

stem stu = praise
aorist 4: astausi:t, stosat, etc.

This looks to me much more like the insertion of an -e- than compensatory
lengthening!

Peter
• On Wed, 31 Oct 2001 20:35:01 -0000, P&G ... I don t follow. If a from like *bher-s-s [CeR-s-s] gives *bhe:rs(s) [Skt. bha:r], then
Message 2 of 15 , Nov 1, 2001
On Wed, 31 Oct 2001 20:35:01 -0000, "P&G" <petegray@...>
wrote:

>> I still haven't got those damn aorist figured out yet...
>
>I don't think you're alone. I find Szemerenyi's explanation for the long
>vowel very odd. If the vowel length were simply from the insertion of -s-
>after a resonant, we would expect Sanskrit stems in -i to produce a
>long -i:s in the aorist,

I don't follow. If a from like *bher-s-s [CeR-s-s] gives *bhe:rs(s)
[Skt. bha:r], then a form like *ney-s-s [ReR-s-s] should give
*ne:ys(s) [Skt. nais].

>but they don't, they give us -ais- / -es. Likewise
>stems in -u give -aus- /-os. (These of course are long and short a + i,
>long and short a + u in Skt) Examples:
> aorist 4: anaisi:t, nesati

The forms in -i:s, -i:t are secondary (after roots ending in *-H).
The original forms were (ind.aor.act.) h1e-ney-s-t > h1e-ne:y-st,

> stem pru: = flow
> aorist 4 prostha:s
>
> stem stu = praise
> aorist 4: astausi:t, stosat, etc.

The stem stu- (and many others ending in -u) are "Narten-presents",
which means that they have vr.ddhi instead of gun.a, and gun.a instead
of zero grade even outside of the sigmatic aorist.
• ... Woops! I was thinking of the bare stem (eg ni, stu) + s. But of course your parallel is right, and my question vanishes. There is, however, another
Message 3 of 15 , Nov 1, 2001
>>we would expect Sanskrit stems in -i to produce a
> >long -i:s in the aorist,
>
> I don't follow. If a from like *bher-s-s [CeR-s-s] gives *bhe:rs(s)
> [Skt. bha:r], then a form like *ney-s-s [ReR-s-s] should give
> *ne:ys(s) [Skt. nais].

Woops! I was thinking of the bare stem (eg ni, stu) + s. But of course
your parallel is right, and my question vanishes. There is, however,
another question. If the vrddhi is due to loss of s after a resonant, why
do we also find it after stop consonants?
examples: stem rudh, aor 4 arautsam, arutsi (= 'obstruct')
greek re:xa from *reg (short e) present re:gnumi
('break')

I'm aware of the argument that this lengthening also affect nominatives such
as Latin pe:s < *ped-s, but here the stop consonant is lost, not the -s.
The other process would be bizzarre, surely? *peds > *pedd > *pe:d >
pe:ds (s restored analogically) > *pe:s.

Peter

----- Original Message -----
From: "Miguel Carrasquer Vidal" <mcv@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 12:47 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] Vrddhi in sigmatic aorist

> On Wed, 31 Oct 2001 20:35:01 -0000, "P&G" <petegray@...>
> wrote:
>
> >> I still haven't got those damn aorist figured out yet...
> >
> >I don't think you're alone. I find Szemerenyi's explanation for the long
> >vowel very odd. If the vowel length were simply from the insertion
of -s-
> >after a resonant, we would expect Sanskrit stems in -i to produce a
> >long -i:s in the aorist,
>
> I don't follow. If a from like *bher-s-s [CeR-s-s] gives *bhe:rs(s)
> [Skt. bha:r], then a form like *ney-s-s [ReR-s-s] should give
> *ne:ys(s) [Skt. nais].
>
> >but they don't, they give us -ais- / -es. Likewise
> >stems in -u give -aus- /-os. (These of course are long and short a + i,
> >long and short a + u in Skt) Examples:
> > stem ni: = lead
> > aorist 4: anaisi:t, nesati
>
> The forms in -i:s, -i:t are secondary (after roots ending in *-H).
> The original forms were (ind.aor.act.) h1e-ney-s-t > h1e-ne:y-st,
> (subj.aor.act.) *ney-s-e-t(i), with normal grade.
>
> > stem pru: = flow
> > aorist 4 prostha:s
> >
> > stem stu = praise
> > aorist 4: astausi:t, stosat, etc.
>
> The stem stu- (and many others ending in -u) are "Narten-presents",
> which means that they have vr.ddhi instead of gun.a, and gun.a instead
> of zero grade even outside of the sigmatic aorist.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
• On Thu, 1 Nov 2001 20:53:01 -0000, P&G ... The lengthening is simply not due to los of /s/ after a resonant or a stop, it is due to
Message 4 of 15 , Nov 2, 2001
On Thu, 1 Nov 2001 20:53:01 -0000, "P&G" <petegray@...>
wrote:

>There is, however, another question.
>If the vrddhi is due to loss of s after a resonant, why
>do we also find it after stop consonants?
> examples: stem rudh, aor 4 arautsam, arutsi (= 'obstruct')
> greek re:xa from *reg (short e) present re:gnumi ('break')
>
>I'm aware of the argument that this lengthening also affect nominatives such
>as Latin pe:s < *ped-s, but here the stop consonant is lost, not the -s.
>The other process would be bizzarre, surely? *peds > *pedd > *pe:d >
>pe:ds (s restored analogically) > *pe:s.

The lengthening is simply not due to los of /s/ after a resonant or a
stop, it is due to the /s/ itself, after any consonant, and
independently of whether it is lost itself subsequently. Think of the
other stem *reg- "king", nom.sg. *re:g-s > Lat. re:x (assuming the
lengthened stem has been carried over into the oblique: re:gis).
Also: Lat. <vo:x> < *wo:kw-s < *wokw-s.

In general, what we find is that the lengthening affects *all* animate
nominatives [originally in *-s], with further developments as follows:

Loss of -s (with *m, *n, *l, *r):
-oms > -o:ms > -o:m (e.g. Grk. khthó:n)
-ons > -o:ns > -o:n (e.g. Grk. dáimo:n)
-éns > -é:ns > -é:n (e.g. Grk. poimé:n)
-ols > -o:ls > -o:l (with -s: Latv. âbuõls [archaism or innovation?])
-ors > -o:rs > -o:r (e.g. Grk. éupato:r)
-érs > -é:rs > -é:r (e.g. Grk. paté:r)

-s Retained (with *y, *w, *k, *g, *kW, *gW, *p, [*b]):
-ois > -o:is (e.g. Hitt. zahha:is; Grk. Sappho: < *-o:is)
-ous > -o:us (e.g. Hitt. harna:us, Grk. patro:s)
-éus > -é:us (e.g. Grk. basileús, Zeús)
-egs > -e:ks (e.g. Lat. re:x)
-okWs > -o:kWs (e.g. Lat. vo:x)
-okWts > -o:kWts > -okWts > -okWs (e.g. Lat. nox [-V:CCC > -VCCC])
-ops > -o:ps (e.g. Lat. o:ps/ops)

Loss of -s / -s Retained? (with *s):
-oss > -o:s (e.g. Grk. e:o:s)
-éss > -é:s (e.g. Grk. eumené:s)

Loss of -C- (with *(n)t, *d):
-onts > -o:nts > -o:ns (with loss of -s: Grk. hekó:n)
-énts > -e:nts > -e:ns (e.g. Lat. de:ns)
-ots > -o:ts > -o:s (e.g. Lat nepo:s)
-eds > -e:ds > -e:s (e.g. Lat pe:s)
-ods > -o:ds > -o:s (e.g. Grk. po:s, pous)

The rule applies not just to *-s, but probably to any final fricative
before a consonant (cluster) [in practice, that means *-s and *-h2].
• Thanks for the full posting, Miguel - that was helpful, and much more believable than what I ve read elsewhere. ... the ... You could add lego (short e) ~
Message 5 of 15 , Nov 3, 2001
Thanks for the full posting, Miguel - that was helpful, and much more
believable than what I've read elsewhere.

>Think of the other stem *reg- "king", nom.sg. *re:g-s > Lat. re:x (assuming
the
>lengthened stem has been carried over into the oblique: re:gis).
>Also: Lat. <vo:x> < *wo:kw-s < *wokw-s.

You could add lego (short e) ~ le:x, but what about du:co < deuco ~ dux with
a short vowel throughout the noun paradigm? Do we just say "exception"?
And if we do, how many such exceptions are there?

Peter

----- Original Message -----
From: "Miguel Carrasquer Vidal" <mcv@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 1:47 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] Vrddhi in sigmatic aorist

On Thu, 1 Nov 2001 20:53:01 -0000, "P&G" <petegray@...>
wrote:

>There is, however, another question.
>If the vrddhi is due to loss of s after a resonant, why
>do we also find it after stop consonants?
> examples: stem rudh, aor 4 arautsam, arutsi (= 'obstruct')
> greek re:xa from *reg (short e) present re:gnumi ('break')
>
>I'm aware of the argument that this lengthening also affect nominatives
such
>as Latin pe:s < *ped-s, but here the stop consonant is lost, not the -s.
>The other process would be bizzarre, surely? *peds > *pedd > *pe:d >
>pe:ds (s restored analogically) > *pe:s.

The lengthening is simply not due to los of /s/ after a resonant or a
stop, it is due to the /s/ itself, after any consonant, and
independently of whether it is lost itself subsequently. Think of the
other stem *reg- "king", nom.sg. *re:g-s > Lat. re:x (assuming the
lengthened stem has been carried over into the oblique: re:gis).
Also: Lat. <vo:x> < *wo:kw-s < *wokw-s.

In general, what we find is that the lengthening affects *all* animate
nominatives [originally in *-s], with further developments as follows:

Loss of -s (with *m, *n, *l, *r):
-oms > -o:ms > -o:m (e.g. Grk. khthó:n)
-ons > -o:ns > -o:n (e.g. Grk. dáimo:n)
-éns > -é:ns > -é:n (e.g. Grk. poimé:n)
-ols > -o:ls > -o:l (with -s: Latv. âbuõls [archaism or innovation?])
-ors > -o:rs > -o:r (e.g. Grk. éupato:r)
-érs > -é:rs > -é:r (e.g. Grk. paté:r)

-s Retained (with *y, *w, *k, *g, *kW, *gW, *p, [*b]):
-ois > -o:is (e.g. Hitt. zahha:is; Grk. Sappho: < *-o:is)
-ous > -o:us (e.g. Hitt. harna:us, Grk. patro:s)
-éus > -é:us (e.g. Grk. basileús, Zeús)
-egs > -e:ks (e.g. Lat. re:x)
-okWs > -o:kWs (e.g. Lat. vo:x)
-okWts > -o:kWts > -okWts > -okWs (e.g. Lat. nox [-V:CCC > -VCCC])
-ops > -o:ps (e.g. Lat. o:ps/ops)

Loss of -s / -s Retained? (with *s):
-oss > -o:s (e.g. Grk. e:o:s)
-éss > -é:s (e.g. Grk. eumené:s)

Loss of -C- (with *(n)t, *d):
-onts > -o:nts > -o:ns (with loss of -s: Grk. hekó:n)
-énts > -e:nts > -e:ns (e.g. Lat. de:ns)
-ots > -o:ts > -o:s (e.g. Lat nepo:s)
-eds > -e:ds > -e:s (e.g. Lat pe:s)
-ods > -o:ds > -o:s (e.g. Grk. po:s, pous)

The rule applies not just to *-s, but probably to any final fricative
before a consonant (cluster) [in practice, that means *-s and *-h2].

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
• On Sun, 4 Nov 2001 07:45:25 -0000, P&G ... I d say exception . Without the benefit of a Latin et. dict., the noun must derive
Message 6 of 15 , Nov 4, 2001
On Sun, 4 Nov 2001 07:45:25 -0000, "P&G" <petegray@...>
wrote:

>You could add lego (short e) ~ le:x, but what about du:co < deuco ~ dux with
>a short vowel throughout the noun paradigm? Do we just say "exception"?
>And if we do, how many such exceptions are there?

I'd say "exception". Without the benefit of a Latin et. dict., the
noun must derive from *douk-s (or *deuk-s), with obl. *duk-ós. That
should have given *du:x, ducis, but here it was the oblique stem that
"won" (the opposite of what happened with re:x, re:gis etc.). The
Ausgleich presumably happened at a stage in Latin where the paradigm
was still an awkward *douks, *dukes.

An afterthought on *-s (and *-h2) in the verb: there are a few other
forms that should have given a lengthened vowel in the stem. The
athematic imperfect (e.g. *[h1e-]es-s "you were") and root aorist
(*[h1e-]kWel-s), the thematic opt. (*-oih1-s), the 1sg. perfect
(*woid-h2). Maybe some of these lengthened grades have left traces,
but it was only in the athematic s-aorist that they formed a solid
block of 2 + 3 sg., capable of dragging along the 1sg. and eventually