Reconstruction talk:Proto-Indo-European/kʷoynéh₂

-nós and -néh₂

@Victar Are we really sure that these are the same thing? The former derives adjectives, while the latter creates nouns. I admit that it's possible that the latter had the former as an intermediate step, but it seems that nouns were being derived directly without any intermediate adjective. That would make *-néh₂ a suffix in its own right. —CodeCat 10:37, 23 July 2017 (UTC) Also, *-nós triggers zero grade, while this has an o-grade. —CodeCat 10:38, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

I imagine it's like similar to *ǵr̥h₂nóm and a substantivised form of the adjective. *-nós doesn't require a zero-grade and it could be derived from an o-grade form. --Victar (talk) 14:13, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

But yeah, I too wish it was cleaner, but I'm hesitant to create a new suffix. --Victar (talk) 14:17, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

*-nós does require a zero grade per Ringe. A suffix that allows either grade would be odd; how do speakers decide which? If there is an o-grade variant, it must be a separate suffix. I would be interested to see what various sources say. —CodeCat 14:56, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

According to Fortson, there's two suffixes. One derives zero-grade adjectives, the other creates nouns. He says the grade of the latter could vary, and cites *swépnos, *swópnos and *súpnos as three possible grades with the same suffix. It appears, at least, that this suffix created nouns with root accent rather than suffix accent. —CodeCat 15:02, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Beekes also separates two different -no- suffixes (one for nouns and one for adjectives), but groups the noun-forming one with -neh₂-. He seems to leave the accent and grade unspecified. —CodeCat 15:11, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Cool, thanks for looking into it. Yeah, we're missing a lot of PIE suffixes, which would be handy to have. --Victar (talk) 15:34, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

@JohnC5 Please see this discussion, as we try and sort of these two suffixes. --Victar (talk) 22:01, 23 July 2017 (UTC)