Re: The oddness of Gaelic words in p-

On 2008-06-03 19:47, stlatos wrote:

> You are the one who said "*ped-ka:- 'sin' > pecca:re", I simply said
> that it was formed from an adj./n (many verbs in -a:- are formed like
> this) with -ik- not -k-. I did not introduce the root *ped and
> certainly didn't say it meant 'foot'. You compared it to:
>
> >> Weiss gives as examples
> >> *ped-ka:- 'sin' > pecca:re,
> >> noting Vedic <pádyate> 'falls' in connection with the
> >> last.
>
> so why would my nearly identical derivation be connected to 'foot' not
> 'fall'? I'd prefer *petiko-, actually, though it made no difference
> in terms of the sound changes I was advocating, so I didn't think it
> needed to be discussed at that time.

I'd like to support Sean's idea. As a matter of fact, I intended to
propose the very same thing myself, but he beat me to it. Here are more
arguments in favour of this derivation:

An original *ped-ka:- is unlikely, as it would probably have undergone
the "thorny" treatment of medial *-tk(^)-. The assimilation *-T-K- >
-KK- affects clusters of secondary origin. Latin has the noun <pedica>
'shackle, fetter', and a syncope of the *deksiteros > dexter type could
easily have produced *pediko- > *petko- > *pekko- with a meaning like
*'(someone) hampered by foot injury' (cf. <mancus> 'infirm, esp. in the
hand' < *maniko-?), hence <pecco:> *'trip, stumble' > 'commit a fault,
sin'. Something similar must have happened in <occa> 'harrow' (cf. Gmc.
*aGiðo:), possibly from *h2ok^-i-táh2 > *okita: > *otika: > *otka > occa
and the associated verb <occo:>.

Piotr