Re: Res: [tied] Etymology of Rome - h1rh1-em-/h1rh1-o:m-

From: Piotr Gasiorowski
Message: 47816
Date: 2007-03-13

On 2007-03-13 20:21, alexandru_mg3 wrote:

> Hu:ma:nus (with a long-vowel) < *dHg^H-o:m-h3n-? versus

It won't work, given the regular changes in Latin.

> Homo: < *dHg^H-m-mo-,
> Humus < *dHg^H-om-o- ...

In my opinion, homo (older hemo) < *(D)g^Hm.-h3o:n (the 'earth' word
plus the Hoffmann element). The initial dental (*dH or *d) was regularly
lost in the zero grade, even if the nasal was syllabic. If one derived a
thematic adjective directly from *g^Hm.h3on- --> *g^Hm.h3n-o- >
*xma:no-, the expected Latin form would be *(h?)ma:nus (there are no
independent examples of *xm-). The unexpected long *u: of <hu:ma:nus>
was discussed here in August/September 2004 (with some suggestions but
no firm conclusion).

> Viewing this we would have similar to : dHg^H-em- / dHg^H-o:m-
> Ro:mulus (*h1rh1-o:m-) (with a long vowel) versus Remus (*h1rh1-em-)

The long *o: of *Dg^Ho:m is regular in a consonantal stem (*Dg^Hó:m,
loc. *Dg^Hem, gen. *g^Hm-ós). Neither Ro:ma nor Ro:mulus are stems of
this kind. Worse still, in the sequence *h1rh1V- the *r would have been
syllabic, eventually yielding *&rV- > arV- after the loss of the
laryngeals in the lineage of Latin.