Re: [tied] Re: 'Dog' revisited

From: Miguel Carrasquer
Message: 27715
Date: 2003-11-27

On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 14:36:48 +0000, Richard Wordingham
<richard.wordingham@...> wrote:

>--- In, "Piotr Gasiorowski"
><piotr.gasiorowski@...> wrote:
>> The analysis of *k^wo:n as *pk^wo:n = *pk^u-o:n (derived from
>> 'livestock') has already been discussed on Cybalist. It has
>occurred to me
>> that the etymology fits in very well with the known patterns of IE
>> formation. One only needs to assume that the word is really a
>compound in
>> which the second element is the "Hoffmann suffix" *-hVn-.
>> Hypothetical *pk^ú-hon- could be expected to produce the following
>> among others:
>> *pk^ú-ho:n > *k^úwo:n (cf. Gk. kúo:n)
>> *pk^ú-hon-m. > *k^úwon-m.
>> *pk^u-hén-s > *k^uén(o)s etc.
>> *pk^u-hn-óm > *k^u:nóm (Cf. Av. su:nam)
>> Since the compound was obscured very early and the simplification
>of the
>> cluster *pk^- took place already in PIE, we have no trace of the
>initial *p-
>> even in Iranian (which normally has *fs^u- as the weak form of
>*pasu- <
>> *pek^u-).
>>Any thoughts?
>Is this consistent with the reconstruction of the 'cattle' word as
>*pekun-, as Miguel proposes, if I understand hime right, at
> ? *pekun- is
>perhaps an archaic form by PIE, but, if I understand correctly,
>formation of *pk^wo:n is also old history by then.

No, in Piotr's explanation, the -n comes from a separate suffix (the
Hoffmann suffix *-Hen), and is not itself part of the root.

If I am right about **pVk^un, then the -n- *is* part of the "cattle" root,
and a formation **pak-ú:n- obl. **pak-u:n-' would lead to *(p)k^wón-,

Miguel Carrasquer Vidal