loss of intervocalic sigma

Stephen C. Carlson scarlson at mindspring.com
Thu Aug 29 22:10:28 EDT 2002


At 06:48 PM 8/29/02 UT, James Tauber wrote:
>I'm trying to work out why the loss of an intervocalic sigma sometimes
>does not occur.
>
>Looking at how nominative singular forms of nouns derive from their
>underlying stems, one encounters one case where sigma is dropped
>between epsilon and omicron (QEOS) and six cases where is it *not*
>dropped between epsilon and omicron (ESOPTRON, EFESOS and the MESOS-
>compounds).
>
>>Does sigma not drop in those cases because:
>
>1. they are more than two syllables?
>2. with the exception of EFESOS, they are compounds?
>3. there is some other process preventing the loss of sigma?
>4. they are merely exceptions to the rule that have to individually be
>noted?

There is a brief discussion of this behavior in
Sihler, pp.171-2 (§ 172).  Basically, intervocalic
*-s- is lost (via *-h-) in Greek, except where it
was restored in verb paradigms based on analogy of
-s- in consonantal stems, or where it is the result
of simplifying a -N.S-, -R.S-, -SS-, or -TS-.

For example, MESOS comes from the attested MESSOS <
< PIE *medhyos (cf. Lat. MEDIUS).  Here the  S- is
from the cluster -SS-.

I suspect that the compounds occurred after the sound
change and were therefore not affected (e.g. ESOPTERON).

Stephen Carlson
--
Stephen C. Carlson                        mailto:scarlson at mindspring.com
Synoptic Problem Home Page   http://www.mindspring.com/~scarlson/synopt/
"Poetry speaks of aspirations, and songs chant the words."  Shujing 2.35



More information about the B-Greek mailing list