Re: [tied] Re: "Will the 'real' linguist please stand up?"

On Sat, 22 Feb 2003 10:20:10 -0000, "tgpedersen
<tgpedersen@...>" <tgpedersen@...> wrote:

>--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski
><piotr.gasiorowski@...> wrote:
>>
>> A minor thing. The Proto-Satem (and proto-Indo-Iranian) reflex of
>*k^ must have been something like *[c] or *[ts'] (palatal stop >
>affricate, the latter preserved in Nuristani). Note FU *porc'as ~
>*pors'as, and Finnish -deksan/-deksän < *teksa, which Koivulehto
>interprets as early Proto-Iranian (something like *dätsa, with *ts >
>*ks).
>>
>> Piotr
>
>*ts > *ks ? Do I see a finger on the weight here?

It's not uncommon. The Dutch for "nothing" is <niets> [nits]
(accidentally very close to the Polish for "nothing", <nic> [n^its]),
but is commonly pronounced as [nIks].

I've been toying with the idea of something similar in PIE, in another
borrowed numeral, "6", if from Semitic *s^eds^ (*s^ets^), giving PIE
*sWeksW.

=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...