Reconstruction talk:Proto-Slavic/sъlnьce

Discussion moved from Appendix talk:Proto-Slavic *solnce.

Which one of these forms is correct? "solnce" or "sъlnьce" (as in Appendix:List of Proto-Slavic nouns/Landscape and seasons and Appendix:Proto-Indo-European *sóh₂wl̥)? I also found in my etymology dictionary form "sl̥nьce". Maro 22:29, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

*sъlnьce is the correct one. *sl̥nьce is just a variant spelling used by some dictionaries, where liquid diphthongs *ъl/*ьl are presumed to be syllabic. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 03:53, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

unattested/unreconstructable

According to Vasmer this word came from *sъlnь and it has descendants: OCS бесльньнъ and Russian солнопёк, солноворот and посолонь (from *по-сълнь-, from *po-sъlnъ). Also i noticed a word усолонь and it came from у + *сълнь-. It's still not enough? —Игорь Телкачь 18:51, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

It likely isn't, since those are derivations. The baseword *sъlnь doesn't have its own reflexes. Same is for the word for "heart". There are two possibilities:

1. Those are independent derivations in OCS and Russian, with no parallels in other Slavic languages, in which case they would indeed be direct reflexes of *sъlnь
2. There were already Proto-Slavic *besъlnьnъ, *poъlnьnъ that have not been retained in any other Slavic language.

The second option does seem more likely to me. Not sure what is the golden rule in such cases, where you have an obviously archaic stem only retained in derivations. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 19:01, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Reconstruction

I would reconstruct it as PIE sh₂ul-n-yo-s and later sh₂ul-ni-ko-m. Who's for it?

5.184.95.20 16:20, 11 August 2020 (UTC)Mateusz