[tied] Re: Eggs from birds and swift horses (was: the palatal sham)

From: elmeras2000
Message: 31208
Date: 2004-02-22

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Piotr Gasiorowski"
<piotr.gasiorowski@...> wrote:

[JER:]
> > I don't like to compromise the infix theory by basing it on
weaker
> etymologies than the ones I have used.

[Piotr:]
> There's no danger of that. Since the infix theory is already
firmly based on
> secure etymologies, it stands on its own (at least as far as I'm
concerned;
> I'm surprised that there's been so little resonance among the
IEists).

I *know* there is a *great* danger here. I have experienced many
episodes where the slightest expression of reservation was enough
not only to disqualify a well-founded theory, but also to serve as
the sole basis for accepting anything completely different. I am
very flattered by your kind words about the solidity of the theory,
I see or hear that very rarely.

Of course you are free to work with the idea and modify it if you
see fit. The only unbiased objection I have right now is that I yet
have to see a safe example of o-infix in a different position from
the one occupied by the full-grade vowel of the root concerned. I
cannot rank Gk. boulé: vs. Welsh blif or Gk. /polló-/ vs. Gk. plê:ma
as serious evidence. Advice is not related to throw by any obvious
connection, and Gk. ple:- is also the result of zero-grade (which
Ved. pári:man- is not).

I do not exclude hat examples with root structures I have not
covered in my presentation of the o-morpheme may have rules that
differ from those I have included. I do not even exclude that the
accent placing rule may be different or invalid for root structures
that do not appear in the material. But I do not assume that just
because I *don't* know. I need to see some proper evidence if I am
to change what looks clear and simple at the moment.

[...]
> The above may also be true of *Cjeh- roots, cf. e.g. *gWojh3-éje-
(Slavic
> *gojiti 'heal') from */gWjeh3(-w)-/. I have already presented some
forms
> consistent with this analysis. [...]

I actually have included this; my finding was that the "o-derivative"
from *gWyeH3- was PIE *gWiH3w-ó-s 'living'.

Jens