Re: [tied] house and hip

From: alex_lycos
Message: 17543
Date: 2003-01-12

Piotr Gasiorowski wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "alex_lycos" <altamix@...>
> To: <>
> Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 9:54 AM
> Subject: [tied] house and hip
>> A question:
>> why cannot be the Germanic word "haus" cognate with Latin word "casa"
>> and the Germanic word "hüfte" cognate with Latin word "coxa"?
> Because there is really no way of relating Germanic long *u: in
> *xu:saz to Latin /a/ in casa. The latter probably represents older
> *kassa < *kadH-ta: (hence no rhotacism), related to <castrum> while
> *xu:saz is usually believed to be a derivative of the 'hide' verb
> (PGmc. *xu:d-j-an- < *ku:dH-): *ku:dH-to-s > *xu:ssaz, with
> degemination after a long vowel. *ku:dH- in turn is an extension of
> the root *keu(-H)- ~ *skeu(-H)- 'cover, conceal', cf. also the
> English _noun_ <hide> 'skin' < *kuH-tís, related to Lat. cutis

Thank you Piotr.

>> Hip:
>> I my dictionary I see that the word "Hüfte" is given as being cognate
>> with Latin "cubitus" but I fail to see the transformation
> It's straightforward:
> Pre-Gmc. *kub-i-s > PGmc. *xupiz (Grimm's Law) > OE hype > hip
> Pre-Gmc. *kub-ita: > PGmc. *xupiþo: > OHG *hupf(i)do: > Ger. hüfte
>> I take in consideration here the following words: latin "coxa",
>> albanian "kofshe:" rom. "coapsa" , germanic "Hüfte" I think nor
>> Romanian word neither Albanian word are reflexes of Latin "coxa"
>> since from Latin "cossa" there could not derive clusters like "ps"
>> and "fsh". In this way, these words are to be seen cognates with the
>> Latin word from very ancient times when even in Latin the
>> pronunciation of the Latin "coxa" was still "cocsa" and not "cossa"
> You must be joking. What "very ancient" times? Lat. -ks- and -ss- did
> not merge yet in Proto-Romance. They give different reflexes in
> several Romance languages. The change of -ks- > -ps- (-fsh- in
> Latinate Albanian words) is neatly parallelled by -kt- > -pt- (lots
> of Romanian examples, e.g. nocte-, lucta-, directa-, frictu-, octo:,
> coctu- > noapte, luptã, dreaptã, fript, opt, copt, etc.; cf. Albanian
> luftë or even Tosk ftua, Geg ftue < *fto:n < *kto:n- < coto:nea
> 'quince')
> Piotr

I am not joking. The "x" in Latin was since long time an "s". For
verifying please see the verb " a lasa" which is coming from Latin

If the cluster "x" in Latin should have been still alive, you will have
in Romanian now an "lapsa" instead of "lasa":

In whole romance world you have reflexes of "las-", "lassa mi", "laise
moi", etc. You have an "leapSa"= a children's game or a slap given to

That shows there was no "x" more in the speech of Latin in that time as
Romans came in Balkans.

Take a look : coxa versus laxare. Once you have "coapsa" once you have
"lãsa". One of them is not inherited then. Which one?:-))

Since just in Romanian and Albanian is the cluster "ps/fsh" Idon't see
why i have to believe that Latin "x" merged in "ps" in romanian since in
the time the romans came in Balcans there was no "x" anymore in use..
Therefore I think this is an substratum word. Maybe Miguel will help a
bit here and will show us why "copasa" but "lãsa".

And please see that even in Germanic we have "lassen, let" which is not
cognate so far I can read, with Latin "laxare".

The Germanic words reflect PIE *lei(d).Which PIe root reflect then the
Latin "laxare"?