From: Piotr Gasiorowski
Message: 19069
Date: 2003-02-23
----- Original Message -----
From: "Miguel Carrasquer" <mcv@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2003 4:14 AM
Subject: Re: [tied] PIE *ts ?
> > [PG] A monosegmental analysis of *ts could furthermore help to explain some "thorny" metathetic developments like *tk (> *tsk > *kts by metathesis) > ks, kt . In Indo-Iranian, this *ts may have participated in the RUKI change (below, *C and *J stand for palatal stops ~ affricates):
> >
> >*kts > *kts^ > *ks^ (> Iranian xs^, Indic ks.)
> >*k^ts > *Cts^ > *Cs^ (> Iranian *s^, Indic ks.)
...
> >*dzg^H > *Jdz^H > *Jz^ (> Iranian *J > Av. z, Indic *gz^ > ks., but preconsonantally *Jz^m- > *Jm- > Indic jm-)
First, I have to retract the idea that *ts was RUKI'ed. If it had been, *ut[s]t, *it[s]t and *rt[s]t would've resulted in Iranian *us^t, *is^t and *rs^t (thus falling together with the RUKI'ed reflexes of PIE *ust, *ist and *rst). Actually, they yield Iranian /ust/, /ist/ and /rst/ (e.g. Av. vista-, Skt. vitta- < *wid-to- [witsto-]) . Therefore, I have to propose early post-obstruent simplification of *ts in the Satem group, preceding RUKI:
*t[s]k > *kts > *ks > IIr. *ks^ (Av. xs^ : Skt. ks.)
*t[s]k^ > *k^ts > *Cs > IIr. *Cs^ (Av. s^ : Skt. ks.)
*d[z]gWH > *gWHdz > *g(H)z > IIr. *gz^ (Av. Gz^ : Skt. ks.)
*d[z]g^H > *g^Hdz > *J(H)z > IIr. *Jz^ (Av. z : Skt. ks.)
> [MCV] But Toch. tkam. and possibly Hitt. tekan show that this *ts was
> definitely post-PIE.
Contrariwise, I think Hittite ezta or ezzatteni (*ezteni) < *h1ed-t.. show it to be PIE. For all we know, /tk-/ may even be the normal development of *dzg^H- in Tocharian A. An isolated example can't prove or disprove anything.
Piotr