(Once again. Not all of my comments
made it. I don't know why.)
Direct quote, including the fiendish diacritics in the first
two sentences.
TochA nātäk (pl. nācki) 'lord', nāśi (pl. nāśśāñ) 'lady'.
Greek has generalized the variant unnatks while Tocharian has generalized
unatks. Greek forms such as (w)anakes, Dioscuri without a -t- may be
back-formations from the nominative (w)anax (<wanakts < wanatks) and/or
the feminine (w)anassa (< wanacca <*wanatkya) since the stage *-cc- would
imply a masculine *-k. (The recessive stress of (w)anassa and/or the recessive
stress of the vocative.) The shape of *unatk- looks looks rather
un-Indo-European and it may betoken an early borrowing from some unknown source.
However, a root of that shape is not totally unprecedented ... and thus may
represent a purely IE inheritance.
Mark.
And what form is that?? I don't own a copy
of the EIEC, but I know a little about Tocharian and this
nâtäk thing just doesn't seem to make any sense. Does Adams
give any details or explain the correspondences?
Piotr
Douglas Q. Adams, in the Encyclopedia of
Indo-European Culture (EIEC) says it shows up in Tocharian A as natak
(macron over 1st a, umlaut over 2nd a).
Showing up in both Greek and Tocharian is
strong evidence for PIE status; Adams suggests it may be a late dialectal
term.
Mark.