Talk:Proto-Indo-European nominals

message: 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)
thread_title: Comments

message: *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)
thread_title:  accent classes 

message: 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 193.190.253.146 (talk) 18:38, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  unclear table 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Ramat's table 

message: 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)
thread_title: Heteroclites

message: Maybe to be re-included later:
     	              	Athematic        	Athematic
     	              	eh₂-stem (ā-stem)	eh₂-stem (ā-stem)
     	              	PIE              	Post-PIE1
gloss	gloss         	grain (f.)       	grain (f.)
sing.	nom.          	                 	
sing.	voc.          	2                	
sing.	acc.          	                 	
sing.	inst.         	                 	
sing.	dat.          	                 	
sing.	abl.          	                 	
sing.	gen.          	                 	
sing.	loc.          	                 	
dual 	nom.-voc.-acc.	?                	?
plur.	n.-v.         	                 	
plur.	acc.          	                 	
plur.	inst.         	                 	
plur.	dat.-abl.     	                 	
plur.	gen.          	                 	
plur.	loc.          	                 	
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  of  "night" is found only in Hittite; evidently, root ablaut in this word was eliminated in favor of uniform  already in the proto-language, after the separation of the Anatolian languages. In the case of  "thought", no daughter languages have root ablaut in this word, but some generalized the strong variant  and some the weak variant  (cf. Gothic ana-minds "supposition" <  vs. ga-munds "remembrance" < ).
--ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 09:05, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed parts of article 

message: According to the accent/ablaut table, the weak cases of proterokinetic nouns like *mén-ti-s and *dór-u should have a full e-grade in the suffix (*mn̥-téy-s, *dr-éw-s). This is true of the genitive singular in the table that is based on Ringe, but the same table shows something entirely different for the singular instrumentative (*mn̥tíh₁, *drúh₁) and almost all the plurals of weak cases (loc. *mn̥tísu, *drúsu, dat. *mn̥tímos, *drúmos, instr. *mn̥tíbʰi, *drúbʰi). Any explanation for this?--95.42.25.28 (talk) 10:18, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradiction between the reconstruction based on Ringe and the claims about the accent/ablaut paradigms