eat

--- In cybalist@..., "Glen Gordon" <glengordon01@...> wrote:

>
> Piotr has understandably argued that many of the verbs that I
> suspect to be Semitish loans are "basic" verbs. Roots like
> *?es- "to be" and *?ed- "to eat" are among my list. However, I,
> for one, doubt that early stages of IndoEuropean used any verb
> at all in equational sentences (much like the situation in Arabic
> or Swahili). Thus, the adoption of a "basic" verb such as this
> is easy. We might also enquire into the exact definition of "basic
> roots".

In Danish, there are two words for "eat": "spise" (of humans)
and "æde" (of animals), calqued on the German
distiction "essen"/"fressen". "spise" is now the unmarked form. You
might imagine a future where *H1ed- has been completely replaced in
Danish. So replacing basic verbs is possible.

The Germans have an expression for that: "herabgesunkenes Kulturgut"
ie. "down-percolated cultural items". You might compare parabolare >
parler etc in Romance, from early Christian jargon. Perhaps *H1ed-
had to do with a sacred meal?

Looking at Sumerian data I suspect also *gWem- "come, go" belongs in
this category.

Torsten