Hana Aghababian (Cornell University)
This paper explores the Latin separative preposition / preverb / first nominal compound member sē̆(-). This discussion is an attempt to address the apparent absence of any comprehensive analysis of this separative morpheme in Latin or its precise relationship to related items such as *se-d (Lat. sed ‘but’), *sen- (*sen-i > Lat. sine ‘without’; *sen-u- Ved. sanu-tár ‘far away’, etc.), and *sn̥- (*sn̥-ter > Grk. ἄτερ ‘apart from, without’, OHG suntar ‘separate, isolated’, etc.) in Indo-European.
My analysis is based on a study of a variety of compounds, adjectives, and other related forms in both Latin and other IE branches. My main points, many of which are in substantial disagreement with what has previously been argued by scholars, are as follows. In Latin, (1) sĕ, which is reflected only in a handful of compounds and serves as the basis of *se-d, is the original form of this morpheme, (2) sē, the simplex preposition (whence eg. sē-d-itiō), shows vowel-final monosyllabic lengthening of the basic *se form, and (3) this lengthened sē was substituted in almost all cases for original sĕ- in compounds, whence compositional sē-. In IE more generally, (4) PIE *se ancestral to Lat. sĕ- was the basis for PIE *se-n-, which was further affixed with elements identifiable as having locatival and/or allatival value in forms such as *sen-i-, *sen-u-, etc., (5) this *se-n- ‘away from, outside of’, because of its oppositional relationship to substantially antonymic *en ‘in, inside of’, was reanalyzed as *sen-, which then became eligible to make a zero grade *sn̥- on the model of *en- : *n̥- (eg. Osc. an-ter ‘inter’, Hom. ἄξυλος ‘with timber on it’ < *n̥-), and (6) this separative item, contrary to what has often been suggested, is unrelated to the IE reflexive pronoun.