tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7202150793869184289.post7542394405718885497..comments2023-09-24T05:45:23.811-05:00Comments on Paleoglot: Rethinking the reduplicated perfect in Indo-EuropeanGlen Gordonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02440249042894225949noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7202150793869184289.post-47966949789491209892008-05-26T19:01:00.000-05:002008-05-26T19:01:00.000-05:00Phoenix: "though technically not CC-ós but CC-R-ós...<B>Phoenix: <I>"though technically not CC-ós but CC-R-ós we have: *uód-r > *udrós."</I></B><BR/><BR/>Not valid, I'm afraid. First, the genitive should be <B>*udnós</B> because it's a heteroclitic inanimate. It's easy to forget though and I still mess up on that.<BR/><BR/>Next, note that in your example, the root portion of the word is not (and never was) asyllabic: <B>*udn-</B>. Therefore it Glen Gordonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02440249042894225949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7202150793869184289.post-54473146765646241502008-05-25T05:55:00.000-05:002008-05-25T05:55:00.000-05:00though technically not CC-ós but CC-R-ós we have:*...though technically not CC-ós but CC-R-ós we have:<BR/>*uód-r > *udrós. If it would really be a form of paradigmatic levelling, I would guess that the genitive would also be *uedrós here.<BR/><BR/>It's difficult to find good examples of CC-ós, since those are only root nouns, of which aren't that many of course.<BR/><BR/>But yeah you'd expect *déms > *dmós while I believe we get *demós.<BR/><BR/>PhoeniXhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17627425696035152752noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7202150793869184289.post-67248736282616715582008-05-24T16:57:00.000-05:002008-05-24T16:57:00.000-05:00Phoenix: "I don't feel that this *e to avoid makin...<B>Phoenix: <I>"I don't feel that this *e to avoid making declensions too obscure is some sort of paradigmatic levelling, but simply a phonotactic matter."</I></B><BR/><BR/>Really? Then I trust you know of a monosyllabic root in PIE that shows a genitive-declined form with an asyllabic root, i.e. of the form <B>*CC-os</B>. I know of no such paradigm and so this is why I think this is less a Glen Gordonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02440249042894225949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7202150793869184289.post-8434666906418745752008-05-23T14:13:00.000-05:002008-05-23T14:13:00.000-05:00I don't feel that this *e to avoid making declensi...I don't feel that this *e to avoid making declensions too obscure is some sort of paradigmatic levelling, but simply a phonotactic matter.<BR/><BR/>no matter in which part of the world you live, a word like pdása is <I>never</I> easy. I guess that a schwa was just inserted in such clusters which you'd write <B>*a</B> Which would make it look like an 'unsyncopated form' while actually it's a PhoeniXhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17627425696035152752noreply@blogger.com