Re: [tied] Wolves and foxes

----- Original Message -----
From: "João Simões Lopes Filho" <jodan99@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 1:01 AM
Subject: Re: [tied] Wolves and foxes


1) Perhaps -x in alopex was a later innovation, alo:pe:ks < *alo:pe:s <
*alo:pe:s- ?

2) Gk. aló:pe:ks, Skt. lopa:s'á- 'jackal', Iranian *raupasa-, Arm. aLue:s
*(h2)loupe:s- or *(h2)laWope:s- or *(h2)laWope:k^-

3) Pre-Latin *olupe:s- > *ulpe:s > *vulpe:s ?


But all non-Latin evidence points to *k^. Loss in one branch (explicable via the Latin diminutive) is more likely than a conspiracy of innovations. If anything is certain in this word, it's the *-pek^- part.

Piotr