From: "P&G" <petegray@...> writes:
>Skt, <sinati>, bind ... and sinew
<<The -n- in Skt is misleading. It's the -n- infix, which we find in a number
of IE languages. the root is actually si (or sa:) and it gives present forms
in class 6 (syati) and class 5 (asinot) as well as the class 9 forms with
infix -n-.>>
Looking at the word in Cappeller's on-line, <sA> seems to give rise to a good
many meanings, not all of them clearly related to 'bind' in our modern sense.
I don't know if there is any room for supposing <sinati> was reanalyzed to
make it fit Sanskrit grammar. But the action of fettering, binding or
catching presumes something to fetter, bind or catch with. This suggests to
me that we are at a later, developed stage of abstraction in the Sanskrit
word. Compare "rope a cow" in American western talk. Or the way the "cord"
word moved from gut, sausage and strings to cordage, cordon and accord. <sA>
used to refer to an undertaking (a 'binding' contract or agreement to do
something) would indicate the word had already traveled to the more abstract
end of the spectrum. Perhaps it's down-to-earth, concrete, practical
origianl meaning had been lost. Or perhaps it was an early loan.
SL