Personal Pronouns

[Patrick C. Ryan]

[ moderator re-formatted ]

Dear Jens and IEists:

 ----- Original Message -----
From: Jens Elmegaard Rasmussen <jer at cphling.dk>
Sent: Monday, May 10, 1999 5:50 PM

> On Sat, 1 May 1999, Patrick C. Ryan wrote:


>> What is so "intangible" about supposing that *te is the basal form, that
>> there was an inflection - *-wV which produced -*twe, and that the original
>> significance of -*twe being lost, both forms came into use as bases for
>> other forms but with a bias towards the form with -*wV for the nominative
>> (through its former topical use): -*tu/u:?

> That you have to postulate a change before you even start.

And what change is that?

> You are disqualifying the evidence which points in a different direction than
> you want to go.

I am discounting an alternate interpretation of the evidence.

> And it is _very_ unsatisfactory to have the preform of *swe 'oneself, sich'
> be a nominative.

Well, perhaps it your view but not in Pokorny's, where we find *swe listed
under *se as *s(e)we, and "*se- und *s(e)we-, Reflexivpronomen fu{"}r alle
Personen, Gechlechter und Numeri".  *swe means simply 'self', and, as such,
is no case-dependent as compounds like *s(w)e-bh(o)- surely show (cf. also
Armenian <in-kn>).


>>> [On Gk. mo:^mar : amu:'mo:n as reflecting *mwoH-/*muH-:]

>>> And, are you asserting, that IE *mow(V)- could *not* result in Gk.
>>> mo:{^}-?

> Of course I am.

Then, of course, you are wrong in view of Greek <no:{^}i>.

>> <snip>

>> Whether you agree with my reasons for those assumptions or not, until I find
>> better reasons, and make other assumptions, I will have to stick to what I
>> have said.

> That may be a very basic difference of attitude. Look, I would change _my_
> assumptions even if I had come up with _no_ reasons of my own, but only
> saw that _yours_ were good. Are you rejecting the dialectic ideal of
> scholarly progress?

If I were, would we be discussing this? And though you have persuaded me of
very little, I have acknowledged revising my views *recently* when presented
with arguments from some other list-members. That is not to say that you may
not persuade me at some future point of a view of yours.

Pat

PATRICK C. RYAN (501) 227-9947; FAX/DATA (501)312-9947 9115 W. 34th St.
Little Rock, AR 72204-4441 USA WEBPAGES:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/2803 and PROTO-RELIGION:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/2803/proto-religion/indexR.html "Veit
ek, at ek hekk, vindga meipi, nftr allar nmu, geiri undapr . . . a ~eim
meipi er mangi veit hvers hann af rstum renn." (Havamal 138)