Re: Present participle

From: Rick McCallister
Message: 60859
Date: 2008-10-13

--- On Sun, 10/12/08, tgpedersen <tgpedersen@...> wrote:

> From: tgpedersen <tgpedersen@...>
> Subject: Re: [tied] Present participle
> To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Sunday, October 12, 2008, 6:49 PM
> >
> > Oh, I see. But another question I have is, if a root
> is encountered
> > only in Italic, Germanic, and Slavic, does that mean
> we should
> > probably reject it as being from PIE? I personally
> feel that that is
> > being rather harsh, especially when it is so easy for
> languages to
> > lose items of vocabulary (cf. Modern English vs. Old
> English
> > especially, but also many modern European languages
> compared with
> > their ancestors). Is there another reason why you do
> not favour (a
> > deliberate choice of word here) the idea of a PIE root
> *ghow- (etc.)
> > besides the fact that if it occurred, it is only
> corroborated in
> > Italic, Germanic, and Slavic?
>
> Not 'should'. The fact that a particular IE word is
> encountered only
> in eg. Europe might make one suspect the word is substrate,
> but it's
> no proof. It takes more than that.
>
>
> Torsten

Meillet had a short list of such words. Torsten, with all your resources, you certainly have a lot more examples.