--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Wordingham" <richard.wordingham@...> wrote:
>
> > > This root would be ultimately related to NEC *h\nitts^wV 'night,
> > > evening'.
>
> > Related how?
>
> > > Either by way of borrowing (in the case the languages involved
> > > aren't genetically related) or common inheritance (otherwise).
>
> > So words are related either by way of borrowing or by common
> > inheritance. Thank you for enlightening me.
>
> > > Wasn't this your question about?
>
> I believe Torsten's reasonable point is that the correct answer to "Related how?" is "I don't know", or perhaps an explanation of why you don't know.
>
> Richard.
>
Ok. Now I see you just approved my older messages #69403 and #69404, but meanwhile I posted #69397 and #69398 in reply to Torsten, so I'm going to summarize my point of view.
As I see it, there're two 'night' words. The first one is represented by NEC
*h\nitts\wV and it's reflected in IE
*nekW-t- as well as Greek
knéphas/gnóphos/dnóphos, with reduction of the labiovelar. The second one is represented by NWC
*(p@-)dz\W@ and it's reflected in Altaic
*dZipHu, Indo-Iranian
*k^sap-, Greek
pséphas/zóphos and Etruscan
favi-. As the NWC root is monosyllablic, the second syllable must be a suffix.
In Starostin's reconstruction, the NWC root corresponds to the second syllable of the NEC protoform, so both are ultimately related. I don't know at present whether if Vasco-Caucasian (roughly the same thing than Starostin's "North-Caucasian") is genetically related or not to Altaic and IE, but at least it's the source of a part of their lexicon.