Праностратическая лексема №1: *ʔA: pc. of plurality.
1. *?a, pc. of plurality: it is found in the N cds. *mi ?a 'we' (q.v.ffd.)
(*mi 'I' + *?a of plurality) and *t'{u4} ?a ≠ *s1{1{u4}4} ?a 'ye (vos)' (q.v.ffd.)
(N *t'{u4} ≠ *s1{u4} 'thou' + *?a),
as well as in HS: S nomina collectiva
(‘ plural forms) with the prefix *?a- (× N *{h}a, pc. of collectiveness, q.v. ffd.)
> Ar ¬UJur0à ?a-rg7ul-un 'feet' (ÿ rig7l-un 'foot'), ?a-yya2m-un
'days' (ÿ yawm-un 'civil day [24 hours], sutki'), ?amtoea2r-un ' r a i n s '
(ÿ matoear-un 'rain'), OSA ?b÷l 'owners' (ÿ b÷l 'owner'), ?hgr
'towns' (ÿ hgr 'town'), Gz ?a-zna2b 'tails' (ÿ zanab 'tail'), ?adba2r
'mountains' (ÿ dabr 'mountain'), ?as6'ra2r 'enemies' (ÿ s6'arr 'enemy'),
?abya2t 'houses' (ÿ be2t 'house'), ?aHk'u2l 'fields' (ÿ Hak'l 'field'); this
patterns is used mostly (but not always) with inanimate nouns; if used
with inanimate nouns, it is syntactically treated (in the predicate verb)
as f. sg. S *-a2, ending of pl. in the fem.-and-inanimate gender: pred. *-
a2, nom.*-a2-t-u(m), accus.-gen.*-a2-t-a(m); pred. f. pl. *-a2 > Ak -a2
(mars5-a2 'they [f.] are ill');
in WS the stative turned into a verbal form denoting state and later into a "new perfective",
accordingly the form with *-a2 became a form of f. pl. of this aspect of state
and of the "new perfective": *mawit-a2 'they (f.) are dead' ‘ 'they (f.) died' (> Ar ma2t-a2 'they [f.] died');
nom. *-a2-t-u(m), accus.-gen. *-a2-t-a(m) are S forms of f. pl.:
*ban-a2-t-um nom. f. pl. df., *ban-a2-t-im accus.-gen. f. pl. df. 'daughters'
(> Ar ba2na2tun nom.¨†bana2tin accus.-gen. 'daughters', BHb ba2≤n-o2t3 'daughters' [without case distinctions])
¶ Br. AG 98-9, Bst. 2 6, GBr. JJAP 56, Di. G 267-72, Jo. M 61, Sd. G 1OO-1, 8* C: Bj ?a,
article of m. pl. (nom.-voc. case) ¶ AD KJ 1O6, Rop. 9 ˚
The initial lr. of the pc. (as suffix) is tentatively identified as N *? because this is the only l r .
that does not cause lengthening in NaIE (*me-s 'we' ather than •me2-s,
the "secondary" ending of 2p *-te rather than •-te2).
The original bisyllabic form of the prn. for 'we' has left traces in Tg *bu4e 'we' (excl.) and possibly in OHg miv [miu4\].
But the Krl Ld diphthong in mu4¢o4 'we' is likely to result from a secondary development (*me2 > *mo4Π > *mu4¢o4).
).