Reconstruction talk:Proto-Finnic/lihaba

-ba
How does -ba fit with the meaning and derivation, which is typical of the -va suffix? —CodeCat 20:52, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Adjectival -v(a) in modern Finnish and Estonian is from *-ba in all cases (though /b/ clearly remains only in Livonian). Positing may not be warranted at all. I am wondering though where you have gotten the comparison with Samic  from. Korhonen in Johdatus lapin kielen historiaan reconstructs  instead (yielding both Northern Sami even-syllable  and odd-syllable ). --Tropylium (talk) 12:45, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Veps distinguishes the two. So there must be a Proto-Finnic distinction as well. —CodeCat 12:58, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
 * That's possible, but doesn't answer the Samic comparison question. --Tropylium (talk) 14:15, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't remember where I got it from either. But I doubt I would have come up with -ŋë on my own, so it must be somewhere. —CodeCat 14:17, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
 * There is indeed a PU deminutive or, quite productive in Mordvinic in particular, but it does not have Samic or Finnic reflexes that I know of. (Aside from one very preliminary proposal that I doubt you could have seen.)
 * Looking it up though, the explanation for the Veps situation appears to be that 3rd syllable *-b- > -v- regularly, followed by generalization of -b as the suffix from strong-grade forms in inflected (productive) forms. (I'd suspect that also *-bi > *-b had already happened by this.)
 * Ludian has a similar situation: *d, *g remain (as stops) everywhere, as does *b when post-tonic, but 3rd syllable *-b- > -v-; including here also the regular participle and 3PS endings. --Tropylium (talk) 17:43, 26 August 2016 (UTC)