sandhi of Skt. -as [was Re: "syllabicity"]

[Patrick C. Ryan]

[ moderator re-formatted ]

Dear Rich and IEists:

 ----- Original Message -----
From: Rich Alderson <ALDERSON at netcom.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 1999 8:31 PM

> On 13 May 1999, "Patrick C. Ryan" <proto-language at email.msn.com> wrote in
> reply to my posting of 11 May:

>>> There is more than one source, for example, of [e:]--see, for example,
>>> _dive dive_ "from day to day", where the first _dive_ is the expected
>>> sandhi variant of the ablative _divas_ "from (a) day".  Thus, again, your
>>> analysis fails to explain the facts.

>> In my opinion, this analysis of _dive dive_ is totally erroneous. This is
>> clearly a reduplicated dative.

> That is the schoolbook analysis of the phrase, but the semantics come out of
> the alternative analysis quite easily (in line with the use of the ablative
> in time expressions elsewhere) and we then need not torture the poor dative
> to mean its own opposite.

>> Also, I am curious if you can cite a non-arguable ablative in -as that
>> becomes -e: in sandhi?

>> Frankly, I find -as in sandhi becoming -e: simply incredible.

> Later, on 16 May 1999, Ralf-Stefan Georg <Georg at home.ivm.de> noted further:

>> Since the ante-voiced sandhi form of -as is -o Pat is right in finding -e
>> simply incredible.

> The sandhi rule in question is that -as becomes -e before voiced dentals, and
> only there.  It applies in internal as well as external sandhi, cf. _edhi_ <
> *as-dhi (_as-_ "be" + imperative).

> This is not, as it happens, my analysis, but what I was taught nearly 25
> years ago in my first Sanskrit class...

Well, as someone who did not know and would have questioned Sanskrir -as
becoming -o in sandhi on phonological grounds (which I now know it does,
phonology be damned), I certainly do not claim anything but a *very*
superficial knowledge of Sanskrit --- but (of course, there is always a
but), what I do not understand is that Whitney (1889, I know), I thought,
was generally fairly well regarded as a Sanskrit grammarian. Under the
rubric "Euphonic Combination", he discusses -s in combination on pp. 58-61.
He first writes the rule that Ralf-Stefan mentioned: -as becomes -o "before
any sonant consonant and before short a (175a)"; and then exceptions: in
176a, he mentions several pronouns in -a{'}s that simply lose their -s's
before any consonant: sa dadarCa, 'he saw'. If I understand the rule you
propounded above properly, we would get **se dadarCa unless you argue that
the accent negates the rule.

Now, I am not asserting anything. I just know too little. But I am curious
why the rule you mention does not seem to be in Whitney, and, in fact, a
different, apparently contradictory rule is described.

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)