Re: s->h

Am Fri, 16 Feb 2007 18:30:52 +0100 schrieb Nikolaj:

Joachim Pense pravi:
- in short versions for personal pronouns (clitics?) the final -s
remained the same: in Sanskrit you have in 1st pers. plur. 'nas' in
Acc., Dat. and Gen.

Not in classical Sanskrit methinks. Sandhi lets the -s survive only
before a word-initial t or th. The paradigma form I learned was "nah",
which is also the form used before pausa. So -s is transformed into -h
if _nothing_ follows.

Yes, with sandhi it is naḥ. But original word is 'nas' (see MW).

Sure. But the word-final sandhi that transforms s to h displays just
the essence of my question.


Or the article
"ho", "he", "to", compare with the Skr. demonstrative "sah", "saa",
"tat").

Similar Slovene demonstatives would be 'ta, ta, to'.

no s involved here, of course.


The word starts with a 'š/sh/ṣ' (unvoiced retroflex
sibilant) in Sanskrit and in Slovene: 'ṣaṣ', 'šest'. Maybe the orignal
word had a 'sh' and it changed to 's' in Latin and to 'h' in Greek,
(while remaining the same in Slavic languages)?

The standard reconstructed PIE form is *sweks for six, and *septm for
seven.

So how did the 'š/ṣ' developed in Sanskrit and Slovene?

No idea.

My basic question was: how can s plausibly develop into h. Your answer
seems to be: via /S/.

Joachim
.

Quantcast