Reconstruction talk:Proto-Balto-Slavic/néba

*nébas
Yes you are right. I forgot to look at the heading. I think that with the ending that Olander postulates, the neuter gender should have changed to masculine gender. So I took Derksen's reconstruction. In the Baltic language, the gender coincided. Thanks a lot for fixing my mistake :V Gnosandes (talk) 11:44, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Just because it ends in *-as doesn't mean it has to be a masculine form or be prone to be reinterpreted as one. The inflectional pattern of this word is very different from a typical masculine o-stem, whereas it has all the hallmarks of a neuter: nominative/accusative/vocative are all identical (so yes, an accusative singular in *-as too!), and in the plural the ending *-āˀ. Moreover, the fact that *s reappears in every form would have made it easy for speakers to analyse the *s of the nom/acc/voc as this same stem-forming element. The only odd thing about it would have been the ablaut -as/-es-. —Rua (mew) 13:30, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Perhaps, but as far as I know, the gender of the wordform is not determined by oblique cases. After all, this may be a typical contamination. Gnosandes (talk) 16:11, 20 March 2021 (UTC)