Re: [tied] More on the crummy sanguis/asrk connection

From: Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
Message: 5070
Date: 2000-12-15

On Fri, 15 Dec 2000 01:04:02 +0100, "Piotr Gasiorowski"
<gpiotr@...> wrote:

>No evidence exists to remedy the circularity of reconstructing the -k in asrk as *-gW.

Look at it this way: on the one hand, we have a Vedic word with an
inexplicable suffix -K, a Latin word without etymology, and a handful
of clearly re-made paradigms (Hitt. <eshanas> should be PD *<ashanas>,
etc.). On the other hand, we have a solution for all three problems.

Is there another explanation for -k in <ásrk>? Is there another
etymology for <sanguis> (I mean a credible one, not "sink")? Are
r/n-heteroclitics not supposed to be PD?

Historical linguistics is all about circularities --mutually
reinforcing, coherent ones--. Otherwise we just keep running in
circles.


=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...