zompist bboard

a congress of convoluted conworldery
It is currently Tue May 22, 2018 8:19 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2188 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 84, 85, 86, 87, 88
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Apr 05, 2018 7:27 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:48 am
Posts: 3090
Location: Brittania
dhok wrote:
For one thing, why do syllabified sonorants yield long vowels, not short vowels?

Where do they yield long vowels?

Quote:
What are some instances of *o not from ablaut that are said to not operate under Brugmann's Law? Just *pótis?

This is an excellent question, and I wish I had an answer for you. Unfortunately, *potis is the only word that recurringly comes up, so that's the only one I know of. I do plan to make a very thorough study at some point in the future, specifically to comb through the entire lexicon looking for any possible examples of non-apophonic and non-coloured *o. The fact that I only have this one example is why I'm refraining from trying to use this theory more generally - I need more evidence for it to be convincing.

Quote:
The best other example that comes to mind is--I assume, I don't actually know--'sheep', where *h₂ówis is reconstructed to give Latin ovis, Lithuanian avìs*, Greek ὄϊς, and Sanskrit avís (not **āvis). However, we have āw in Tocharian B, and that must be from an e-grade *h₂éwis. So we then reconstruct an *o~*e ablaut pattern in the paradigm of "sheep", and the Indo-Iranian reflex can then come straightforwardly from the e-grade, like the Tocharian. (We've also got Lycian χawa-; the o-grade would have yielded **χewa-).

When I was at Leiden in the summer of 2016, the prevailing theory was that "sheep" actually goes back to *h₃éwis; *h₃-colored *e is then supposed to have a different quality from original *o, so that original *o is subject to Brugmann's but *h₃-colored *e isn't. But I don't see how you're going to explain the Tocharian reflex this way; you've got to have *h₂éwis.

Well, it's a good thing I reconstruct *h₂owis ~ *h₂ewis.

Nortaneous wrote:
snip

Oh, I get you now. Well, the o-grade thematic vowel probably counts, as does the *o of o-stem pronouns. I know the former does lengthen in Indo-Iranian, but not if the latter does - yet, theoretic considerations say that it should derive from former *aː.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 05, 2018 7:51 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 7:39 pm
Posts: 3256
Location: The Eastern Establishment
KathTheDragon wrote:
dhok wrote:
For one thing, why do syllabified sonorants yield long vowels, not short vowels?

Where do they yield long vowels?


If *e₁ *e₂ *o₂ *o₁ *i *u = *a *i *ā *u *ī *ū, as the six-vowel theory proposes, then we've got syllabified *w *y giving long *ī *ū in pre-IE. Nort proposes there may have been schwa-epenthesis followed by monophthongization, i.e. *CwC > *CəwC > *CūC > *CuC, but this is yet another additional assumption the theory must adhere to simply to explain the data.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 05, 2018 8:32 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:48 am
Posts: 3090
Location: Brittania
Ah, I see. In my framework, those schwas are from the original underlying vowels, so *CawC > *CəwC > *CuːC > *CuC


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 05, 2018 8:39 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 7:39 pm
Posts: 3256
Location: The Eastern Establishment
So...wait, zero-grades derive from e-grades? (Or are they 'a-grades'?)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 05, 2018 9:15 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:48 am
Posts: 3090
Location: Brittania
More or less, yes, though I thought this was generally understood, since verbs preserve the distribution between accented e-grade and unaccented zero-grade particularly well, e.g. *h₁ésti < *h₁ásti vs. *h₁sénti < *h₁asánti


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 16, 2018 9:09 am 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 5:00 pm
Posts: 4321
Location: Braunschweig, Germany
Alwin Kloekhorst seems to think that *h2 and *h3 were uvular stops in PIE; his web site teases us of a manuscript in which he says that there is evidence of this in Anatolian; alas, the manuscript is not available, so nobody knows what his argumentation is.

_________________
...brought to you by the Weeping Elf
Tha cvastam émi cvastam santham amal phelsa. -- Friedrich Schiller
ESTAR-3SG:P human-OBJ only human-OBJ true-OBJ REL-LOC play-3SG:A


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 16, 2018 10:38 am 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:48 am
Posts: 3090
Location: Brittania
I take things Kloekhorst says with a pinch of salt and a very critical eye, since he's said several things which I think are utter bullshit.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 16, 2018 10:47 am 
Smeric
Smeric
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 1:13 pm
Posts: 1540
Location: Halfway to Hyperborea
WeepingElf wrote:
Alwin Kloekhorst seems to think that *h2 and *h3 were uvular stops in PIE; his web site teases us of a manuscript in which he says that there is evidence of this in Anatolian;

If I had to guess, probably the Lycian reflexes as k q g.

_________________
[ˌʔaɪsəˈpʰɻ̊ʷoʊpɪɫ ˈʔæɫkəɦɔɫ]


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 16, 2018 11:57 am 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 5:00 pm
Posts: 4321
Location: Braunschweig, Germany
KathTheDragon wrote:
I take things Kloekhorst says with a pinch of salt and a very critical eye, since he's said several things which I think are utter bullshit.


Yes, many things he has written are ones I do not agree with at all, such as his reconstruction of the Proto-Anatolian (and Early PIE) stop system, and his recent defence of the perfect theory of the hi-conjugation. Some of his ideas are interesting nevertheless. I don't know what I should think of this one; the laryngeals may have been uvular stops once, but probably in PIE1 at its latest; I am of the opinion that in PIE2, they already were fricatives. The Lycian stop reflexes appear to be a late innovation, as the cuneiform spellings in Luwian suggest fricatives as in Hittite.

_________________
...brought to you by the Weeping Elf
Tha cvastam émi cvastam santham amal phelsa. -- Friedrich Schiller
ESTAR-3SG:P human-OBJ only human-OBJ true-OBJ REL-LOC play-3SG:A


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 16, 2018 12:44 pm 
Osän
Osän
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 2:57 pm
Posts: 11396
Location: Scattered disc
Im not aware of ther being reflexes of h2 & h3 in Hittite but Id like to see how the author reconstructs words with laryngeals in between consonants. e.g. if the word for father is /pqter/ or something like /pəqter/ instead. Im not sure how we know what the values of the letters were in lycian anyway ... couldnt they have been like the Romans etc who used letters for more than one sound?

_________________
Sunàqʷa the Sea Lamprey says:
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 16, 2018 2:39 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:48 am
Posts: 3090
Location: Brittania
Soap wrote:
Im not aware of ther being reflexes of h2 & h3 in Hittite

You must've been living under a rock, then, because Hittite is quite famous for being the first discovered language to have consonantal reflexes of laryngeals in . Examples are ḫanza, ḫant- "forehead" < *h₂ent-, ḫāraš, ḫaran- "eagle" < *h₃eron-.

Quote:
Im not sure how we know what the values of the letters were in lycian anyway ... couldnt they have been like the Romans etc who used letters for more than one sound?

Kloekhorst has actually done a study on this.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 19, 2018 11:52 am 
Sanci
Sanci
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2017 7:43 pm
Posts: 62
Location: Campinia
WeepingElf wrote:
KathTheDragon wrote:
I take things Kloekhorst says with a pinch of salt and a very critical eye, since he's said several things which I think are utter bullshit.


Yes, many things he has written are ones I do not agree with at all, such as his reconstruction of the Proto-Anatolian (and Early PIE) stop system, and his recent defence of the perfect theory of the hi-conjugation. Some of his ideas are interesting nevertheless.


For me, it's his attack on Narten and E/O acrostatic ablaut patterns that makes me cringe. I think the Leiden model is weak. Somehow, with the magic wand of accent shifts, everything is derived from some clean paradigm. And anything that points in a different direction is reasoned away in a lawyer like way.

But I am curious how these laryngeals could have been uvular stops when (1) they behave like fricatives in the rules that determine the structure of a PIE syllable and (2) they reduce to zero or *h, but never *k, in all PIE languages.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 19, 2018 2:28 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:48 am
Posts: 3090
Location: Brittania
Well, some of the pre-stages the Leiden model assumes are plausible, such as an original R(Ø)-S(é)- in the amphikinetic accusative, and it's even possible that the nominative there had S(Ø) as well, but that's strictly speaking beyond the comparative method.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2188 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 84, 85, 86, 87, 88

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group