In the posting that started this exchange I
should have written, "The composition form of 'two' is *dwi- (sometimes *wi-)".
Sorry.
The compositive variant of "two" was originally *dwi- (= Latin
bi-, Sanskrit dvi-), as in *dwi-pód- 'two-footed', but at least in the numeral
"20" it was reduced to *wi- early enough for this form to be inherited by most
branches. I think the compound element *wi- 'apart, asunder, in two', as in
*wi-tero- 'opposite, distant' and *wi-dH(e)h1- 'divide, separate' may go
back to *dwi- as well. A different result of (much later) cluster reduction is
visible in dis- < *dwis-, with a very similar meaning. The form *dwi- is of
uncertain origin -- either analogical to *tri- or produced by some archaic
alternation like *du-o-/*du-i- (cf. kW-o-/*kW-i- in pronouns).
*wi(:)k^mti: possibly resulted from a conflation of two types of decad
formation coexisting in PIE: the noun phrase "two tens" *du-o-ih1
d(e)k^mt-ih1 (*-ih1 is the dual ending of PIE neuters) and the compound
"2-decad" *wi-(d)k^omt- (with a neuter collective as the second element).
Similarly for other decads: *tri-h2 d(e)k^mt-ah2 or *tri-(d)k^omt-, with a
variety of mixed forms.
Piotr
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2001 5:08 AM
Subject: Re: [tied] The centum-word.
> Check the numeral "twenty", Mark.
>
>
Piotr
I had, and did again. Yes. Indeed: the twenty-word begins with
wi-.
EIEC says it's a dual.
I would not recognize a dual. I did
not get that far in Greek. Is this
why I am being obtuse?
Please,
Piotr: explain. All the two-words and related prefixes really
do begin
'dw'.