--- In cybalist@..., "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
> > I can see *frocca > dialect 'frock' (cited in Falk & Torp, who
> > propose a different derivation), but do you have examples of the
> > mangled onset being more marked? The other forms still seem to
> have
> > a <-cga> suffix, unless one can derive 'wicga' from something
like
> OE
> > <wagian> = 'totter', 'sway' (>? 'wag') or an unattested ancestor
> > of 'wiggle'.
> >
> > Richard.
>
> Given Da. 'ørentvist', dial 'øretvinde', is 'wicga' = wick?
(twining
> again), PIE *veg- "weave" (plus Germ. gemination)
>
I got an odd idea again.
The original puzzlement here was over the suffix or extension Germ -g-
(PIE -k- ?), why it occurred with two unclean, one slimy, one creepy
and one normal animal, and why those words were found only on the
British Isles and whether or not they (words and/or things) were
imports from SE Asia.
I looked at "wick" and realized: this is really "fold, pleat" and it
should go here.
http://www.angelfire.com/rant/tgpedersen/wgh.html
(or here
http://www.angelfire.com/rant/tgpedersen/II.html
)
PIE *w-g- "weave"
but there's also a
PIE *w-d- "web"
so how about this
-(i)k- forms aktive participles in a small part of PIE vocabulary
Lat. am-ic-us
Gk. guna-ik-
(and of course it spread to other words later)
Therefore Latin 'duco', with that unexplained -k-, is a back-
formation from 'dux' (and 'facio' from '-fex').
Notice also that
'rex' is the guy who sets things right
're-' is the thing he sets right.
Perhaps the velar (gH or k?) is an old ergative, with an absolutive
in -t- or -d- (amicus vs amatus, *w-g- vs *w-d, found in
both "transport" and "water" (cf Proto-Oceanic 'wiq' "boat",
Norse 'viking'), *(H-)r-g- "the man who fixes the order" vs *(H-)r-
"the thing that is fixed", *(H-)-n-k- "snake" vs *(H)-n- "breath,
spirit")?
Note that these are all roots to be found on
http://www.angelfire.com/rant/tgpedersen/austric.html
the roots I (and others) claim to be shared among IE, AfroAasiatic
and Austronesian.
> Torsten