Re: [tied] Re: Dating PIE

Yes, but Albanian is Satem, and a form *yetswV- can't be the source of
*ye/ikw-. Therefore maybe this yetsw- could explain some Greek names
in -iss-/-ess-, for example Marpessa. Or, if we go further, explain Medousa
as related to *MedHw-ek^wi: (cf. Celtic Equomedua) , through a
"Thraco-Illyric" *Med(o)w-yetsva > Medoessa , besides "standard" Medowentja
"Queen, ruler'.

----- Original Message -----
From: Miguel Carrasquer Vidal <mcv@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2001 7:48 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] Re: Dating PIE


> On Thu, 18 Oct 2001 17:41:59 -0300, "João S. Lopes Filho"
> <jodan99@...> wrote:
>
> >Greek is HIPPOS is a paradoxal word. Such usual word *ek^wos must have
been
> >*ep(p)os, or *ekkos in Greek, without anomalies. I think some
anthroponyms
> >in Epi- were corrupted forms of a prefix *Epo- "horse". Hippos points to
a
> >intermediary *hik^wos (< *sik^wos?, *yik^wos?). A form *yik^wos would be
> >similar to Tocharian yäkwe. Perhaps a Tocharian-like language was spoken
in
> >Greece before the Greeks. It's stated that Tocharian was akin to
> >Italo-Celtic, may we assume that a Tocharo-Italo-Celtic stock have
branches
> >in Greece?
>
> Not very likely. A development e- > ye-/yi- is not exceptional (it's
> common in e.g. Slavic and Romance). *ek^wos is not attested, I think,
> in Albanian, but should have given *yes (through something like
> *yetswV). I have no reason to assume the development /e/ > /ye/ in
> Albanian dates to the first millennium BC, but no reason to assume
> that it didn't either. In any case, the development is common enough
> for it to have happened in any of the poorly attested IE languages
> neighbouring Greece, or in one of the misty IE substrate languages in
> Greece itself. No real need for Tocharian.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>