Reconstruction talk:Proto-West Germanic/klainī

*klinaną
I think it would be beneficial to show in the etymology rather than, as the potentiality of a relationship is obscured by *klenan being a Class 5 verb. A Class 1 verb is more elucidating: >  >, parallels  >  > , whence 🇨🇬~~. Leasnam (talk) 13:36, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I can certainly see the sense of "small" being derived from "clay, made of clay, (i.e. )" where clay figurines are concerned. From the "plastered" sense, I can see how a sense of "fixed up, made to look nice" could arise. "Polish" would be "smearing of butter, fat, or oil" onto something old and dusty, like leather boots. Leasnam (talk) 13:54, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
 * How does >  happen? -- Sokkjō 23:23, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
 * It doesn't "happen". It's analogous. ">" is probably not the best way to describe the correspondence between original ī/[i] and ai (PIE e-grade and o-grade). The 1st and 3rd person singular preterite of is .  is a noun (> 🇨🇬). I'm not an Indo-Europeanist, so I haven't studied the derivational processes; but it's evident that many Germanic nouns correspond to preterites of Class 1 + -ō (e.g. *drībaną~*draib,*draibō; *rīdaną~*raid,*raidō; *līþaną~*laiþ,*laidō, etc. In some instances these "preterite" o-grade stems have adjectives in -iz, like  and  above. It's often a reliably predictable pattern. You might be able to explain it better though. Ironically,  fits nicely into this pattern: *klī̌naną~*klain,*klainō,*klainiz>; almost too nicely. Leasnam (talk) 23:37, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I've never heard of nouns being built on the past indicative. Usually secondary full-grades come about from secondary verbs, like newly built causatives. I don't see the point of trying to explicitly derive it from, especially since it itself looks more like a secondary strong verb from an original iterative, than a nasal-infix. -- Sokkjō 02:47, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Are you saying that a nasal infix into, making it could result in it becoming  ? Leasnam (talk) 03:33, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm saying that, assuming it's of PIE origin, is either from a lost causative (secondary or not), or inherited from PIE . -- Sokkjō 03:56, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Then from, perhaps causative of ; but could there be an adjective (?) Leasnam (talk) 13:33, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
 * 1. PIE ⇒  > (laryngeal metathesis)  > PG  > PWG
 * 2. PIE ⇒  > PG  ⇒  ⇒  > PWG
 * 3. PIE ⇒  > PG  ⇒ (secondary causitive)  ⇒  > PWG
 * Hypothesis #3 strikes me as the most likely as it supposes a single innovative nasal. -- Sokkjō 16:48, 19 March 2024 (UTC)