Reconstruction talk:Proto-Indo-European/mértis
Add topicAppearance
Latest comment: 2 months ago by Exarchus in topic accent
accent
[edit]Latin clearly reflects *mr̥tis, and also Balto-Slavic *mr̥tís, per its etymology. @Bhagadatta Indo-Iranian seems to reflect it as well? Should we move this? Catonif (talk) 09:11, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Sokkjo? Given diff. Catonif (talk) 10:10, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
- No, this is just later leveling. -- Sokkjō 10:13, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Sokkjo You mean it's regular evolution? And if so, can we trace this back as the original accent? Catonif (talk) 10:25, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
- Morphological leveling#Ablaut leveling. -- Sokkjō 10:32, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Sokkjo I see, thank you, but how can we assume the levelling wasn't already present in the PIE stage? Catonif (talk) 11:38, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Catonif That's a very good question. Whether the proterokinetic paradigm even existed has been doubted lately, see in the first place Kiparsky (2010), whose analysis of PIE accent has been taken up in the Handbook of Comparative and Historical Indo-European Linguistics (so same book where “*mér-ti- ~ *mr̥-téy-” is given, by another author), at pages 2121-2137. Kümmel has also written about this in Zum “proterokinetischen” Ablaut (2014), but I couldn't find it.
- Simply looking at the attested forms, it's more natural to reconstruct nom.sg. mr̥tís, without root ablaut in the declension. I'm inclined to think similar can be said for *bʰértis, *méntis, and maybe also *gʷémtis (as Sanskrit गति (gáti) might come from earlier gatí, see here; for Germanic, part 3 of Kiparsky's paper is relevant).
- If someone has recently defended the existence of the proterokinetic paradigm, I'd like to hear about it. Exarchus (talk) 16:44, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Kümmel's paper is here. Exarchus (talk) 18:43, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Sokkjo, Victar Sorry to bother you again with this, but is the form *mértis found in mainstream sources? I can only find *mr̥tís. Should I take this to WT:ES? Catonif (talk) 09:33, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
- @Catonif: Kim, Ronald I. (2017–2018) “Chapter XVIII: Balto-Slavic”, in Klein, Jared S., Joseph, Brian D., Fritz, Matthias, editors, Handbook of Comparative and Historical Indo-European Linguistics: An International Handbook (Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft [Handbooks of Linguistics and Communication Science]; 41.2), Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, →ISBN, § The phonology of Balto-Slavic, page 1978: “*mér-ti- ~ *mr̥-téy-”. -- Sokkjō 20:04, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
- @Sokkjo I see, thank you, but how can we assume the levelling wasn't already present in the PIE stage? Catonif (talk) 11:38, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
- Morphological leveling#Ablaut leveling. -- Sokkjō 10:32, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Sokkjo You mean it's regular evolution? And if so, can we trace this back as the original accent? Catonif (talk) 10:25, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
- No, this is just later leveling. -- Sokkjō 10:13, 29 April 2023 (UTC)