Aryan: Difference between revisions
| Line 2,790: | Line 2,790: | ||
===Case=== | ===Case=== | ||
Aryan possesses 5 primary cases (nominative, accusative, genitive, locative, and dative), with '''X''' secondary cases seen as borrowed affixes. [...] In PIE, the secondary forms of the genitive and dative became canonic in some pronouns and noun declensions, as the development of "mine" and "to you" show: | |||
: ''*aiǵṓn'', ''*nn'' (Aryan) ⇒ ''*h<sub>1</sub>eǵóm'', ''*méne'' (PIE) ⇒ ''अहम्'', ''मम'' (Sanskrit) | |||
: ''*tū́'', ''*tu̯pʰa'' (Aryan) ⇒ ''*tuH'', ''*tébʰi'' (PIE) ⇒ ''tu'', ''tibi'' (Latin) | |||
[...] | |||
The Indo-european accusative ''*-m'' ... as an earlier allative<ref name=Pooth>Pooth et alii (2018); [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/324360155%20The%20Origin%20of%20Non-Canonical%20Case%20Marking%20of%20Subjects%20in%20Proto-Indo-European%20Accusative%20Ergative%20or%20Semantic%20Alignment The Origin of Non-Canonical Case Marking of Subjects in Proto-Indo-European: Accusative, Ergative, or Semantic Alignment]</ref> | The Indo-european accusative ''*-m'' ... as an earlier allative<ref name=Pooth>Pooth et alii (2018); [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/324360155%20The%20Origin%20of%20Non-Canonical%20Case%20Marking%20of%20Subjects%20in%20Proto-Indo-European%20Accusative%20Ergative%20or%20Semantic%20Alignment The Origin of Non-Canonical Case Marking of Subjects in Proto-Indo-European: Accusative, Ergative, or Semantic Alignment]</ref> | ||