Re: [tied] Latin longus < *dlh1-ongh-o

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Sean Whalen <stlatos@...> wrote:

>
>
>
> --- alexandru_mg3 <alexandru_mg3@...> wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > I saw some difficulties to link Latin & Germanic
> > 'long' to the root
> > for long: *delh1gh-o ; *dolh1gh-o ; *dlh1gh-o
> >
> > The idea that I have seen is to consider the root to
> > be only *delh1-
> >
> > like: *delh1-gh-o ; *dolh1-gh-o ; *dlh1-gh-o
> >
> > and in this case Latin & Germanic 'long' are derived
> > as:
> >
> > PIE *dlh1-ongh-o > [dl>l] > Latin longus
>
> These derivations incorporate some of my own ideas.
>
> dól-n^-ghós with dln^-gho- in zero-grade in cases
> formed by adding an affix with a tone:
>
> dol-n^-gho- > da-luK-ki etc. Hittite
> dol-n^-gho- > dolikhó-/dólikho- Greek
> dol-n^-gho- > dlon^-gho- > longus Lat.
> dol-n^-gho- > dlon^-gho- > langaz Germ.
> dln^-gho- > dl:-gho- > d@:r-gha- > di:rgha- Skt.
> dln^-gho- > dlN-gho > darN-ga- > dar@... Av.
> dln^-gho- > dlN-gho > druN-ga > drung Khowar
> dln^-gho- > dl:-gho- > dlu-go- > dlUgU OCS
> dln^-gho- > dl:-gho- > l-go- > ilga- Lith.
>
> There must be a nasal there instead of a "laryngeal"
> since no H becomes Greek i; only a nasal prevents g>G
> in that position in Av. (sprH-go- > spa-r@-Ga
> bursting, spreading); and there's a nasal in other
> forms even in Indo-Iranian (drung).
>
> I reconstruct n^ (palatalized n) to account for
> cases (mostly in Greek and Indo-Iranian) when a
> syllabic nasal has an "unexpected" outcome (such as n
> > a but n^ > i in Greek and Indo-Iranian; n > un but
> n^ > en in Armenian).
>
> Similarly, n^+H > n^: > ni: in Sanskrit unlike more
> common n: > a: (and retroflex n.: > a:n. > various
> depending on following sound).
>
> If it were velar N not n^ then there'd be no rN > r:
> in Sanskrit since syl. r or l only lengthens if the
> nasal has a different place of articulation from the
> following C (see SrNga- horn or r-stem acc. pl.).
>
> Other examples of n^ include the imperfect nasal
> infix (shown by n^+H > n^: > ni: in Sanskrit), potn^s
> "master, lord", and poln^s "settlement, city".
>

You point has a good coherence trying to unify all the forms.
However it's weak point is that you need to postulate add additional
sound n^ in PIE.
I think that this is one of the reasons for which the Greek
dolikhos is derived currently as *dolh1-i-gho- (Lubotsky) even some
incoherences to integrate all the forms remain.

Marius