Timeline for Why νώ (rather than νῶ) from νόω? (Greek)
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
39 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 9, 2018 at 3:33 | vote | accept | Catomic | ||
| Aug 8, 2018 at 7:17 | comment | added | Nick Nicholas | Ok, cool. Whether or not I trust you, by the way, I am seriously impressed by you. :-) | |
| Aug 7, 2018 at 12:56 | comment | added | Alex B. | @NickNicholas He does! I just assumed I would be trusted so I did not include the first three sentences from that paragraph. If you take a look at page 128, you will see that. That’s what “cette constatation” in my quote refers to. | |
| Aug 7, 2018 at 9:00 | comment | added | Nick Nicholas | Kurylowicz isn't taking about contract duals though: he is saying that even in the uncontracted duals, you would expect a circumflex but for analogy. | |
| Aug 7, 2018 at 8:58 | comment | added | Nick Nicholas | And importantly, the contract duals are Attic and classical, meaning that it was already in retreat there anyway. That's what inclines me towards analogy. | |
| Aug 7, 2018 at 3:00 | history | edited | Alex B. | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 147 characters in body
|
| Aug 7, 2018 at 2:57 | comment | added | Alex B. | @NickNicholas I've been reading the relevant sections in Kurylowicz 1958 today (see the quote above) and I started to lean towards analogy. :) | |
| Aug 7, 2018 at 2:54 | history | edited | Alex B. | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 839 characters in body
|
| Aug 6, 2018 at 5:25 | comment | added | Nick Nicholas | Thank you for keeping on with this. I take it you prefer Bubenik's external account. Myself, I see the analogy as inevitable, given how infrequent contract duals are... | |
| Aug 5, 2018 at 5:14 | history | edited | Alex B. | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 364 characters in body
|
| Aug 5, 2018 at 5:08 | history | edited | Alex B. | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 364 characters in body
|
| Aug 5, 2018 at 1:46 | history | edited | Alex B. | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 119 characters in body
|
| Aug 4, 2018 at 22:23 | history | edited | Alex B. | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 640 characters in body
|
| Aug 4, 2018 at 3:10 | history | edited | Alex B. | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 172 characters in body
|
| Aug 4, 2018 at 2:44 | history | edited | Alex B. | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 146 characters in body
|
| Aug 1, 2018 at 23:10 | history | edited | Alex B. | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 667 characters in body
|
| Aug 1, 2018 at 15:33 | history | edited | Alex B. | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 123 characters in body
|
| Jul 31, 2018 at 2:35 | history | edited | Alex B. | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 338 characters in body
|
| Jul 31, 2018 at 0:47 | comment | added | Nick Nicholas | At least it's better than positing a substrate. :-) But I understand the concern. | |
| Jul 31, 2018 at 0:16 | history | edited | Alex B. | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 28 characters in body
|
| Jul 31, 2018 at 0:14 | comment | added | Alex B. | @NickNicholas I 'm afraid I might have come off unnecessarily dismissive of analogy an a factor of language change. I do not deny its importance. What I meant to say was that analogy has been used in historical linguistics - far too often! imho- when anything else fails. As Jasanoff puts it, "the effort to put limits on analogy — to discover the conditions under which this type of change is likely to operate and in what direction — remains an important goal." | |
| Jul 30, 2018 at 22:36 | comment | added | Nick Nicholas | Analogy may lack oomph, but it happens all the time, and it certainly happened in ancient Greek accentuation. I'm more sanguine about the prospect. | |
| Jul 30, 2018 at 21:08 | history | edited | Alex B. | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 463 characters in body
|
| Jul 30, 2018 at 21:02 | history | edited | Alex B. | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 463 characters in body
|
| Jul 30, 2018 at 17:25 | comment | added | Alex B. | @Nick Nicholas Yes, it’s not an explanation because there isn’t one yet. At least, I’m not aware of it. :) | |
| Jul 30, 2018 at 15:55 | comment | added | Nick Nicholas | Yup, I did see all of p. 554, 557, and 562—but none of those explicitly discuss the accentuation of contract dual -ώ. The "neuen Nominative Ersatzwort" is simply Koine replacing contracted with uncontracted forms (ὀστοῦν > ὀστόν); likewise the mention beforehand "Durch den Auusgleich der Akzentqualitäten wurden -ῆ -ᾶ usw. mit -ή, -ά gleichwertig" refers to the elimination of length distinctions in Koine: it's not an explanation for the claimed Attic -ώ. | |
| Jul 30, 2018 at 13:18 | comment | added | Alex B. | @NickNicholas I found it Schwyzer - see my updated answer at the very end; no time to type all the Greek forms now. | |
| Jul 30, 2018 at 13:15 | history | edited | Alex B. | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 300 characters in body
|
| Jul 30, 2018 at 5:05 | comment | added | Nick Nicholas | By confirmation: perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/… Kühner–Blass provide no explanation either, although analogy looks obvious. And @varro, the related case of περίπλω is clearly analogical, especially as it is restricted to compounds (and multisyllabic names, but those are usually compound, so that's another analogy). | |
| Jul 30, 2018 at 3:44 | history | edited | Alex B. | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 279 characters in body
|
| Jul 30, 2018 at 3:39 | history | edited | Alex B. | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 279 characters in body
|
| Jul 30, 2018 at 2:24 | history | edited | Alex B. | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 366 characters in body
|
| Jul 29, 2018 at 23:28 | history | edited | Alex B. | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 525 characters in body
|
| Jul 29, 2018 at 21:44 | comment | added | Alex B. | @varro I see. I'll think it over. Let's agree on analogy for now. | |
| Jul 29, 2018 at 20:15 | comment | added | varro | A possible explanation might be analogy. Actually, I think some sort of analogy is likely involved, but it would take outlining a possible path of development for that to be put forth as an explanation. Consider the somewhat related case of περίπλους ‹ περίπλοος. Note the dual of this is περίπλω, whereas *περιπλῶ from περιπλόω would be expected. Here one can explain the "irregular" accentuation on the basis of analogy with other forms of the contracted form having the accent on the penultima. | |
| Jul 29, 2018 at 19:37 | comment | added | Alex B. | @varro Aren't exceptions usually explained ad hoc? What kind of explanation did you expect? (just curious) | |
| Jul 29, 2018 at 18:43 | comment | added | varro | That's a statement of fact noting the exceptions, but not an explanation of why the exceptions occur. | |
| Jul 29, 2018 at 17:25 | history | edited | Alex B. | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 238 characters in body
|
| Jul 29, 2018 at 17:16 | history | answered | Alex B. | CC BY-SA 4.0 |