--- In cybalist@..., "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@...> wrote:
> Mmm... What about *nesti, *le^zti, *plyti, *vesti (*vez-), *vesti
(*ved-), etc. vs. *nositi, *laziti, *plavati, *voziti, *voditi? Is
there anything "sessive" about the latter series? The difference is
between one continuous action and iterative movement ("around", "up
and down", "to and fro"). How does one sit to and fro?
>
But where is that **xosti? Again, the -i-stem by itself doesn't imply
an iterative. My point was that *xod- denoted a habitual action, a
state or, with your permission, a way of life - like Gypsies do, like
Cumans did, like proto-Greeks (hode'uo: 'walk, go' and 'drive',
he'dos 'seat') did, like Indo-Europeans did. Why do you think archaic
semantical syncretism is impossible for PIE *sed-?
Sergei