Hittite & Celtic dative in /k/ ?

[Miguel Carrasquer Vidal]

ECOLING at aol.com wrote:

>In a message dated 8/3/99 6:49:38 PM, 114064.1241 at compuserve.com writes:

>>the comparison is unlikely, as the Hittite form is also used for the
>>accusative, an use for which it has cognates in Germanic (gotic mik) and
>>perhaps in Slavic (russian ko - to with only an allative meaning). The
>>primary meaning was probably allative, as for most accusative in IE.

>This kind of information in no way lessens the probability of connection,
>since (as stated just above) the accusative may derive from an older
>dative (or allative or etc.).  This kind of information CAN suggest that
>a connection may have great(er) time depth, to allow time (how much?) for
>a common change to occur in one or another language.
>(I assume it is not being proposed that the ORIGINAL meaning was
>accusative, and that the accusative developed into a dative or allative?

Neither dative nor allative.  Simply an emphatic particle (cf.
Greek -ge) added to what would otherwise have been endingless
pronominal forms:

Nom.  u-k, ammu-k     zi-k           we-es, anz-as  sum-es
Gen   amm-el          tu-el          anz-el         sum-el
DL    ammu-k          tu-k           anz-as         sum-as
Acc   ammu-k          tu-k           anz-as         sum-as
Abl   amm-eda-z       tu-eda-z       anz-eda-z      sum-eda-z

Luwian has amu, Palaic ti/tu.

=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv at wxs.nl