Re: [tied] *ekwos and friends

--- Miguel Carrasquer Vidal <mcv@...> wrote:

> On Tue, 16 Oct 2001 16:47:43 -0700 (PDT), george
> knysh
> <gknysh@...> wrote:
>
> >--- Miguel Carrasquer Vidal <mcv@...> wrote:
> >> *ek^wos would have given Slavic *eswU or *oswU.
> >
> >*****GK: Yahoo cut out as my message was going out.
> So
> >I'll briefly repeat it and ask for your indulgence.
> My
> >question: Are you saying that "satemization" works
> >universally and absolutely in languages affected by
> >it, and that there are no examples in these
> languages
> >of words which escaped the process?****
>
> There are exceptions in native (Balto-)Slavic words,
> but this is not
> one of them, judging by Lithuanian <es^va>, <as^va>
> "mare".

*****GK: The assumption that what holds for Baltic
also holds for Slavic is just an assumption. AFAIK
(correct me if I err) there is no es- word connected
with "horse" in Slavic.*****

>
> Other exceptions occur in words borrowed from
> "centum" languages, but
> we would rather expect horse vocabulary to be
> borrowed from the steppe
> (cf. Russ. loshad', merin), i.e. from languages
> that, if they were IE,
> were satem.

*****GK: But why assume (not impossible of course but
why assume) that (all? most?) horse words in the
eventual Slavic (a) were borrowed and (b) borrowed
from a satem language? Incidentally what's your view
of the source for Slavic "kon'"["komon'"?] (later(?)
"kin'" in Ukr. [although there are two Sanskrit words
which would be similar minus the suffix: kinlin,
kindhin])******

In any case, that's how this discussion

> started
> (Indo-Iranian loans in Slavic).
>
>
>

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com