IE thematic dual (Gothic <au>)

Eduard Selleslagh edsel at glo.be
Thu May 13 10:16:59 UTC 1999


-----Original Message-----
From: Jens Elmegaard Rasmussen <jer at cphling.dk>
Subject: IE thematic dual

>On Mon, 10 May 1999, Richard M. Alderson III wrote:

>[... (JER: Goth. ahtau has diphthongal form of them.dual., like Skt.
>as.t.au, ergo the -u was IE already:)]

>> The final <au> in Gothic is a spelling of [O], and does not bear on the
>> presence or absence of a final *-u in the Indo-European dual, nor is it
>> entirely clear that the word for '8' is a dual.

>But what can then be the source of the Goth. -au, how ever pronounced?
>Both *-o: and *-a: give Goth. <-a>.

[Ed Selleslagh]

May I add a very down-to-earth remark: in Antwerp Dutch dialect (of Frankish
origin), in certain positions (depending on the phonetic history of the
<o:>), <o:> is always pronounced <au>, like in 'auto' ('car'), pronounced
<ottau>; or 'over' (same as in English) ==> <auver>. Maybe the Goths did
exactly the same, and wrote it. [In other words with a different phonetic
history for the <o:>, it is pronounced <u:@>, like in 'lopen' ('to run')]

I do believe that present-day phonetic phenomena are relevant, even when
dealing with languages that died out many centuries ago, and especially when
these are related to the modern language.  Not all wisdom comes from
Sanskrit, which is not even a kentom language, and as such, in a way, one
step farther away from PIE, because of the satemization (I won't restart the
discussion about this term or the y>g>y issue).



More information about the Indo-european mailing list