It's conceivable (not to say more than
likely) that the second *sekW- is a dissimilatory by-form of *swekW-, i.e.
*wekW- 'say, tell' plus "mobile" *s-.
The development *kW (as well as
*k^w) > k before rounded vowels is regular in Latin, cf. pre-Latin
*sekWondos > *sekondos > Lat. secundus 'second, following', or *jekWr >
*jekWor > *jekor > iecur 'liver'. The labiovelar, however, was often
restored analogically, which is why we have <equus> (on the analogy
of <equi:>) rather than *ecus, or <quod> (like most other
*kW-pronouns) rather than *cod. Latin eliminated the paradigmatic alternation
k : kW by generalising one or the other of the alternants;
cf. vo:x (with the early simplification *-kWs > -ks), pl. vo:ces
(analogical, instead of *voques < PIE *wokWes).
Piotr
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 2:31 PM
Subject: [tied] *seq- "follow" and *seq- "tell"
Can anybody offer an explanation why
there are two
separate IE roots (Pokorny)
*seq- meaning "follow, go in order" lat.
sequor, gr.
(/epomai, eng. sequence, etc.
and
*seq-
menaning "tell in order" (lat. inseco < insequo
- b.t.w. why did the
labiovelar simplify into the
gutural here?- gr. )enne/pw <
*en-sequo)