Reconstruction talk:Proto-Indo-European/kʷoynéh₂

-nós and -néh₂
Are we really sure that these are the same thing? The former derives adjectives, while the latter creates nouns. I admit that it's possible that the latter had the former as an intermediate step, but it seems that nouns were being derived directly without any intermediate adjective. That would make a suffix in its own right. —CodeCat 10:37, 23 July 2017 (UTC) Also, triggers zero grade, while this has an o-grade. —CodeCat 10:38, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I imagine it's like similar to and a substantivised form of the adjective.  doesn't require a zero-grade and it could be derived from an o-grade form. --Victar (talk) 14:13, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
 * But yeah, I too wish it was cleaner, but I'm hesitant to create a new suffix. --Victar (talk) 14:17, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
 * does require a zero grade per Ringe. A suffix that allows either grade would be odd; how do speakers decide which? If there is an o-grade variant, it must be a separate suffix. I would be interested to see what various sources say. —CodeCat 14:56, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
 * According to Fortson, there's two suffixes. One derives zero-grade adjectives, the other creates nouns. He says the grade of the latter could vary, and cites, and  as three possible grades with the same suffix. It appears, at least, that this suffix created nouns with root accent rather than suffix accent. —CodeCat 15:02, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Beekes also separates two different -no- suffixes (one for nouns and one for adjectives), but groups the noun-forming one with -neh₂-. He seems to leave the accent and grade unspecified. —CodeCat 15:11, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Cool, thanks for looking into it. Yeah, we're missing a lot of PIE suffixes, which would be handy to have. --Victar (talk) 15:34, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Please see this discussion, as we try and sort of these two suffixes. --Victar (talk) 22:01, 23 July 2017 (UTC)