From: Arnaud Fournet
Message: 61849
Date: 2008-12-03
----- Original Message -----
From: "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2008 10:55 AM
Subject: Re: [tied] Negation
>
> On 2008-12-03 10:30, Arnaud Fournet wrote:
>
>> ne oukwi can become n- ouki ?
>> kwi > ki instead of pi ?
>
> Instead of <ti>, actually (before a front vowel). The delabialisation of
> *kW after *u/w in a fixed compound (as in boukolos < *gWou-kWolh1o-) is
> regular.
========
This presupposes that the longest form is the oldest.
There is no clear proof for that.
It seems Mycenean already had short forms 'ou'.
Long forms could also result from expansion of the short one.
What indications do you have that the long or the short one should be
considered the oldest ?
H2oju-kwi > ouki is somehow brilliant,
but brilliant does not mean right.
Why is it *Hoju does not yield oü ?
Why should 'ou' not be connected with a large variety of words like
u-(bogu), etc ?
I guess this is an "old" question,
what does a rather objective assessment of this question looks like ?
A.
========
>
>> (h)aud is "not"
>> I thought the h was just a graphic adornment.
>
> No, it's always there. The word is consistently <haud, haut> (very
> occasionally <hau> before a consonant in early Latin), not *<(h)aud>.
> Whatever its etymology, it's clear that both here and in the case of Gk.
> <ouk(í)> the "true" negator was deleted and the surviving element is an
> original emphatic particle (like French <pas> or English <not>).
>
> Piotr
>
=========
ok
Let's admit this !
A.