B nädɪ: corresponds to C næde:. This could conceivably be a borrowing--it's difficult to figure out what happens to final long vowels in C; at least some instances look like inflectional endings whose presence is not determined by historical phonology alone--and the affrication has a little bit of parallel in B de~C dzə. But based on other data, of course, that looks more likely to be a case of *de > djə > dzə (are we sure it isn't dʒə)?KathTheDragon wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2019 1:01 pmBased on the vowel correspondence alone, I wonder if it could actually be the cognate of B ɔɪdɪː. -ɪː seems to be a suffix in B, and based on B ɣɪtɪz ~ C ɣes, I suspect that C underwent a simplification *ts > s at some stage (for B -ɪz ~ C -s after a voiceless stop, see βəgɪz ~ wʉks). So we could have *əɪts for proto-BC
If you are right, however, B~C ɣɪtɪz~ɣes (sentence 1) is intriguing. Taken together these may suggest palatalization of *t to /s/ before (or after?) /ɪ/. (The -ɪz suffix of B looks probably to be the same clitic that created wä:z from *wæn.)