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

From: João Simões Lopes Filho
Message: 5119
Date: 2000-12-18

First, I made a mistake in the first e-mail on this subject and repeated
then on the other ones: -gh->-h-, not >zero. What I'd mean to mark is that
in some cases occurs the -h->zero (note medial h is less common than the
expected), cf. nemo "nobody" < ne-homo (or ne-hemo?). And about po:mum
"fruit" - this is just a bet, I'm not sure if po:mum < *po-g^homo- < *g^hom-
"earth"; or < *podmo- < *pod- "soil, ground")

You showed exactly the causes of my doubts: I had the examples gramen,
glaber and ravus, so I didnt know if ghr> r or gr. <The one exception is
probably a Sabellian word borrowed into Latin, namely ravus < *ghraH-wo>
In Sabellian ghr> r? gh>zero?
----- Original Message -----
From: petegray <petegray@...>
To: <cybalist@egroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 17, 2000 8:59 AM
Subject: Re: [tied] More on the crummy sanguis/asrk connection


> João said:
> >I've already ever doubts about the various developments of *gH in
Latin...
> >gH- > Italic X- > h-
> >-gH- > Italic -gh- > -h- > zero
> >-igH- > -ig cf. (ve-)stigium
> >-ngH, -rgH, -lgH > -ng, -rg, -lg
> >gHr- > gr- or r-?
> >-gHr- > ?
>
> Perhaps not entirely true! Firstly, clarification. I assume you are
> meaning the single PIE phoneme /gh/ , not the combination /g/ + any
> laryngeal.
>
> If you mean /gh/, your theories don't appear to fit the evidence
completely.
> (i) Medial -gh- > -h- survives quite happily in Latin in some words, eg
veho
> < *wegh-.
> (ii)Likewise the initial /h-/ disappears in others, eg anser < *ghans
> (iii) Medial ghC > gC, eg figulus < figlus < *dhigh-lo-
> (iv) Initial ghr, ghl > gr, gl, eg glaber <*ghlHdh-ro-, gramen <
*ghrH-s-mn.
> The one exception is probably a Sabellian word borrowed into Latin, namely
> ravus < *ghraH-wo. The true Latin form survives in gravastellus = "grey
> headed person" (Pl. Epid. 620).
> (v) medial gh near /u, r, l/ > h.
> (vi) The derivation of vesitigium is far from certain. The outcome (-g-
> < -gh-) would be unique in Latin (I think), so it seems unlikely.
>
> Peter
>
>
>
>
>
>