|WikiProject Linguistics||(Rated B-class)|
Can anyone give a quick summary of what these terms mean? acro-dynamic, protero-dynamic, hystero-dynamic and holo-dynamic.
this isn't covered yet, on Wikipedia, you'll need to turn to actual books. Briefly, it concerns the position of a word's accent, and hence ablaut grade, within the inflectional paradigm (different stresses in different grammatical cases). dab (𒁳) 11:48, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
- proterodynamic = "moving accent, towards the front" = accent varies between root and suffix
- hysterodynamic = "moving accent, towards the back" = accent varies between suffix and ending
- holodynamic = "moving accent, across the whole word" = accent varies between root and ending
- acrostatic = "stationary accent, on the root"
when the accent varies, the strong cases (nom and voc, plus acc sing/dual) have the further-front variant and the weak cases have the further-back variant.
Beekes seems to believe that holodynamic words had accents in three places: HEUS-oos (nom), hus-OS-m (acc), hus-s-OS (gen) "dawn". Fortson gives these as HEUS-oos, HEUS-os-m, hus-s-ES. (h = h2, oo = long vowel)
Benwing 05:44, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Some information on why the table is missing so much forms, why there is a list of forms that are neither thematic nor athematic and why thematic feminine and a big part of neuter are not present, would make things clearer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 18:38, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm removing Ramat's table because it is incomplete and confusing (athematic: no fem., thematic neut: only sg. etc; see the last talk secton). Will replace it with Fortson. --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 19:32, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
|Masculine and Feminine||Neuter||Masculine||Neuter|
|Genitive||*-es, *-os, *-s||*-ōm||*-os(y)o||*-ōm|
|Locative||*-i, Ø||*-su, *-si||*-oi||*-oisu, *-oisi|
It would be good to include the evidence from attested langauges for the heteroclites. In particular, I came here looking for nice evidence for it in the word for 'fire'. English 'fire' versus Gothic 'fon' is nothing like as convincing as Hittite watar, witenas (both taken from Fortson 2010: 123). Tibetologist (talk) 09:34, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
Removed parts of article
Maybe to be re-included later:
1Because of the large number of laryngeal consonants in this noun class, possible "Post-PIE" (non-Anatolian) forms are shown, after the loss of laryngeals. In reality, not all daughter languages developed in the same fashion. However, all but the Anatolian languages (e.g. Hittite) eventually lost the laryngeal consonants, and the developments were fairly similar across languages; as a result, the forms given are largely accurate. The caron underneath vowels that were adjacent to laryngeals (e.g. *ō̬) is meant to indicate that in some languages (particularly the Balto-Slavic languages), these vowels maintained some property that distinguished them from non-laryngeal vowels.
There were strong pressures early on to eliminate some of the complexities of this system, especially the ablaut variations in the root. For example, the ablaut variant *nékʷt- of *nókʷts "night" is found only in Hittite; evidently, root ablaut in this word was eliminated in favor of uniform *nókʷt- already in the proto-language, after the separation of the Anatolian languages. In the case of *méntis "thought", no daughter languages have root ablaut in this word, but some generalized the strong variant *ment- and some the weak variant *mn̥t- (cf. Gothic ana-minds "supposition" < *mentís vs. ga-munds "remembrance" < *mn̥tís).