HISTORICAL GRAMMAR OF OLD PRUSSIAN

30
V. Maþiulis
ing” and I consider it to be a derivative with a suffix adj. fem. *-en` from
adj. (pc. pt. pass.) Pr. *karta- ‘(what is) hung’ Lith. k³rti etc.). Cf. more detailed in PEÞ II 131–134. Pr. (E) gle[u]ptene
‘mouldboard’ = *gl’aubtenç or *gl’aubtinç arose in the same way (PEÞ II
275 f.).
For Pr. suf. *-în` cf. krixtieno (E) ‘earth-swallow’ = *krîkstîn¯É (PEÞ
II 275 f.).
* 54. Adjctives with a suf. *-en- (: *-an-) produced: glosano ‘slowworm’
(PEÞ I 383 f.), pelanno ‘hearth’ (PEÞ III 247) and pelanne ‘ashes’,
warene ‘copper cauldron’ (PEÞ IV 220), wissene ‘ledum (palustre)’ (PEÞ
IV 255).
* 55. Pr. suf. *-men- was used to derive consonant-stem nouns,
e.g.: Pr. (E) semeno ‘plover (Brachvogel)’ = *sçmen¯É < adj. (fem.) *sçmen`
WBalt., EBalt. Latv.
*ðû- ‘to sew’, cf. Pr. (E) schumeno), as well as from adjectives (Balt. dial. *plesa-, cf. Pr. (E)
plasmeno – PEÞ l.c.), or substantivized adjectives (Balt. *ƒzeltan, cf. Pr. (E) sealtmeno – PEÞ l.c.).
This derivation was no younger than Common (or at lest West) Baltic epoch, therefore could not
be productive in historical Prussian. – L.P.
19 Suf. *-in-, *-în- meant origin or belonging to a group (sort), and were used to derive nouns and
adjectives from nouns. They were productive in Prussian, cf. Pr. fem. *dein` (cf. acc. sg. deinan
III) ‘day’ --> deininan (III) ‘daily’, *kaims (cf. caymis E) ‘village’ --> acc. sg. kaimînan (III)
‘neighbour’. This root (similarly to Lith. k³imas ‘village’, ki…emas ‘farm, yard’, Latv. cÑems ‘idem’)
represents a “centum” exception of satemization in a “satem” langiage – cf. its regular “satem’
counterpart Pr. seimîns III, Lith. ðeim$, Latv. saime, ORus. ñºìüÿ. For regular correspondences
in “centum” languages cf. Go. haims ‘village’, Gk. êþìç ‘idem’. Lith. k³imas is considered to be