From: Sergejus Tarasovas
Message: 1807
Date: 2000-03-09
Piotr wrote:3. I think I have already given a tentatively positive answer to this one. The only problem I can see is the semantic difference between pushing and being pushed (one would have to propose a plausible scenario for a mediopassive origin of the Lithuanian verbs). And how about adding Slavic *CINst- 'often, frequent(ly)' (Russian chasto, etc.) and Lithuanian kim^Stas 'stuffed full' < ?*knt-tó- 'pushed, poked'? Is it far-fetched in your opinion?Sorry, I must missed your answer somehow.*knt-tó- would more regulary be reflected as *kimstas, but I'm not sure. As for *CINst-, I still think (as I stated in one of my early postings) that the semantic derivation is 'smthng cut (off)'>'piece' for CENsti- and 'fragmented'>'frequent' for CENsto-, that would force as to envolve PIE *ken- 'cut' suffixed with *-t- in Proto Slavic, compare direct (not suffixed) derivates like *CINt-/*kon- 'beginning/end'<'smthng cut'Sergei