--- In cybalist@..., "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@...> wrote:
> No need to laugh, *dus-dju- is parallelled in other branches, e.g.
> Skt. dur-divas-a- and dur-din-a- 'rainy day' (this is my whole
> point). For more examples of *dus-diw/n- 'rainy day' and *h1su-
diw/n-
> 'nice day, fair weather' in Indo-European, see Msge #2837.
>
But that message contains no other *dus-diw/n- 'rainy day' examples
but already mentioned Sanskrit lexemes. In fact, we have _one_
parallel, which is, of course, better than nothing, but still not
enough IMHO. I wonder what is more natural typologically: a
designation of rain as 'bad day' or 'patterer'. Consider frequent (if
not characteristical) _personification_ of rain in Slavic folklore,
rain being an object of invocation (like Russian <doz^dik, doz^dik,
pushshe, dam tebe gushshi> 'rain, rain, harder, I'll give thee the
thickiest part of the soup'), which makes nomen actionis much more
natural by default. How are you going to feed 'a bad day'? And why?
To make it even worse? Too absract for me. Again, where are those
*dus- and *diw- (not din-) in Slavic? What evidence exists of
*dUz^dz^I being -u stem (rather than -(j)o-stem?
Sergei