Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

PIE genitive plural *-o:m, a possible analysis

Expand Messages
  • Patrick Ryan
    An idea occurred to me today that I would like to offer for criticism and comment. I have long believed that the *o-stem genitive singular, -*ós, should be
    Message 1 of 3 , Apr 4 1:37 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      An idea occurred to me today that I would like to offer for criticism and comment.
       
      I have long believed that the *o-stem genitive singular, -*�s, should be regarded as a simple prosodic variation of the nominative singular -*os � a simple shift of the stress-accent from the root to the post-root syllable.
       
      I propose that the earliest neuter nominative singular in -*om formed a nominative plural in -*�m, and the neuter genitive plural was differentiated from it by length: -*�:m.
       
      Subsequently, the neuter nominative plural was re-formed with -*Ha(:), leaving -*�:m as the neuter genitive plural without a prosodic counterpart in the nominative.
       
      This neuter genitive plural form was subsequently adopted by the -*o-stems.
       
       
       
       
       
       
    • Rob
      ... The idea is interesting, but I do not see any evidence for the stress-contrasts that you describe. Could you explain where you see evidence for these
      Message 2 of 3 , Apr 5 6:46 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Ryan" <proto-language@...>
        wrote:
        >
        > An idea occurred to me today that I would like to offer for
        > criticism and comment.
        >
        > I have long believed that the *o-stem genitive singular, -*ós,
        > should be regarded as a simple prosodic variation of the nominative
        > singular -*os -- a simple shift of the stress-accent from the root
        > to the post-root syllable.
        >
        > I propose that the earliest neuter nominative singular in -*om
        > formed a nominative plural in -*óm, and the neuter genitive plural
        > was differentiated from it by length: -*ó:m.
        >
        > Subsequently, the neuter nominative plural was re-formed with
        > -*Ha(:), leaving -*ó:m as the neuter genitive plural without a
        > prosodic counterpart in the nominative.
        >
        > This neuter genitive plural form was subsequently adopted by the
        > -*o-stems.

        The idea is interesting, but I do not see any evidence for the
        stress-contrasts that you describe. Could you explain where you see
        evidence for these contrasts?

        Thanks,
        Rob
      • aquila_grande
        There are many reasons to believe that the distinction singualar-dual- plural was poorly developed in the earliest faces of IE, except in the nominative. There
        Message 3 of 3 , Apr 6 1:14 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          There are many reasons to believe that the distinction singualar-dual-
          plural was poorly developed in the earliest faces of IE, except in the
          nominative.

          There are also reasons to believe that in this early faces, there
          existed more case endings or postpositions with related meaning.

          In a later face two case endings or postpositions with a genitive-like
          meaning could be differentiated as a singualar and plural ending.

          Furthermore the genitive endings attested, seem to be a contraction of
          something formally more ample.

          Let us suppose as a working hypothesis that there existed two genitive-
          like endings -h2es and -h2em

          The first could be diiferentiated to a singular ending and the other
          to plural ending.

          Later they were contracted.

          In thematic stems: e-h2es > eh2s > o:s, e-h2em > e-h2m > o:m (with the
          accent on thematic wowel.

          In atematic stems: -h2es > h2s > &s > -os, -h2em > -h2m > &m >-om


          The particularities I sketch out here are not thoroughly worked out,
          but I think that something like this could be a good starting
          hypothesis.
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.