Re: [tied] Re: IE prefix "*s"

On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 23:45:26 +0100, Piotr Gasiorowski
<piotr.gasiorowski@...> wrote:

>19-12-03 22:40, Miguel Carrasquer wrote:
>> I prefer Pokorny's explanation *<ex-upo> > <sub>. "Out from under", "out
>> from behind" et sim. are concepts that merit their own preposition in a
>> number of languages (e.g. Polish <spod> and my favourite, <zza>).
>
>Yes. My only problem with it is that the <sup-> group is isolated among
>the Italic prepositions/preverbs. Polish has <spod> 'from under' as well
>as <znad>/<sponad> 'from above', <sprzed> 'from before' as well as
><zza>/<spoza> 'from behind', and of course the simplex pronouns <pod>
>'under', <nad> 'above', <przed> 'before, in front of' and <za> 'behind'.
>Latin, however, lacks not only forms like *sinfra: 'from undeneath' <
>*ex-infra: but even s-less *<ub>, *<uper>, etc.

The last point is easy: sub and super don't mean "from under" or "from
above" anymore, they mean "under" and "above". Latin <unde> > OSpa. <onde>
"from where" displaced Latin <ubi> > OSpa. <o> "where", so that in time a
new ablative <de onde> was created, which in turn replaced <onde>, so that
a new ablative <de donde> was created, which hasn't replaced <donde>
"where", yet. But <o>, <do> and <onde> are gone.

As to the first point, I don't know.

BTW, I see that Oscan has <up>, <úp> "at" (i.e. apud) [Silvestri úp Ramat &
Ramat, p. 339], besides <sup>.

=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...