Re: [tied] Morphology (20/20)

From: Piotr Gasiorowski
Message: 16594
Date: 2002-11-03

I'd cut it up into *h1oi-h1n-o- ("dialectal" variants: *h1oi-ko-, *h1oi-wo-). But I don't think Miguel is unhappy with the traditional analysis; *h1dH-néwm. is of course his analysis of *deve~(tI) '9', not of 'one'. To be sure, I think that the influence of *dese~tI in serial counting is a more likely explanation of the initial. 
----- Original Message -----
From: Sergejus Tarasovas
Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2002 10:28 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] Morphology (20/20)

--- In cybalist@......, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@......> wrote:
>Slavic *ed-i:nU "1", perhaps *h1dh-néwm.

Why are you not happy with the more traditional reconstruction
*jedinU< *(h1edH-)HoiH-no-s, supported by Sl. *inU 'one' < *HoiH-no-
s, with BSl. *ái > (sporadically) *éi, as in Lith. _víenas_ (probably
also from [*something > v-] plus *HoiH-no-s) alongside OPruss. _ains_?


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.