Re: [tied] A remark to *k'onk-

From: Sergejus Tarasovas
Message: 9298
Date: 2001-09-10

--- In cybalist@..., "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@...> wrote:
> What do you make of the Hittite pattern ka:nki 'hangs
[transitive!]' (-a:- = a scriptio plena vowel), pl. kankanzi, usually
thought to reflect *k^onk-/*k^nk-ont-? The *o/zero alternation looks
rather natural here, while an *a/zero (?) ablaut pattern in the hi-
conjugation remains to be discovered and discussed. It is one of
those mysterious o-presents that make some people postulate a whole
special class of verbs conjugated like the Hittite hi-verbs. What if
the original "branch" word was *k^onkos 'hanger' or *k^nk-(stressed
suffix-) rather than *k^ank-?

Slavic has *so,kU 'bough, snag', while Baltic *s'ak- 'branch'. What
if the verb *k^onk- 'hang (trans.)' is an -n-infixed (to mark
transitiveness/activeness in contrast to mediopassiveness of
uninfixed form *k^ok- 'hang (intrans.)' denominative < *k^ok(H)-
'branch'? Then Slavic lexeme might be a deverbative ('hanger').