Re: Thalassan Possessive Suffixes

Quoting Henrik Theiling <theiling@...>:

> Hi!
>
> Andreas Johansson <andjo@...> writes:
> >...
> > Anyway, I like the suffixes. I do wonder, tho, whether the sound-changes in
> the
> > pl forms are regular - the loss of the second-to-last vowel seems a tad
> odd.
>
> Hmm, not necessarily, I think.  It might be perfectly feasible given
> the right stress patterns (or some other good explanation).  Note that
> Latin has interesting syncope, too due to accent shifts, too:
>
>   gaudere < *ga-widere
>   gavisus < *ga-wisus
>
> Prote-Norse also drops the penultimate when the ultimate cannot be
> dropped for some reason.  E.g. singular of 'cauldron' is 'ketill',
> but plural is 'katlar'.  This is regular:
>
>     *katilaR  > *katilR > *ketilR > ketill
>     *katilo:R > *katlaR           > katlar
>
> Syncope drops ultimate vowel if short and before a given set of
> consonants, of which R happens to be one, and otherwise shortens (and
> recolours) the last vowel and drops penultimate.  (Also note the
> beautiful i-umlaut that only occurs in one of the forms.)
>
> So I'd say with the right explanation, the Thalassan drop of vowel is
> perfectly feasible.
>
> (Or did you find the vowel drop odd for some completely different
> reason that I fail to see?)
I said it seemed odd, not infeasible or unnatural - that's why I asked if it was
a regular development in the language. One could certainly think up scenarios in
which such an outcome would be regular - I was wondering if he'd done so, or if
was an irregular reduction of these particular clitics.

                                                                Andreas