"Charakteristik der Thrakischen Sprache", Sofia 1960
IV Die indoeuropäischen Palatale k', g', g'h
Page 155
[...]
-zenes, -zenus, -senus, in der Pn "Aulou-Zenis", "Dia-zenus",
"Muca-senus" u.a. < ide. *g'en, in gr. "genos"= Geschlecht", ai.
"jana-h", av. "zana"= Volk, Gr. Dio-genes, Demo-genes.[...]
One read it and agrees. OK, here someone try to find correspondences for
these names and he finds out Greek and Sanskrit correspondence, and he
learns that from PIE *g'en we have in Thracian an "zenus" or "senus".
A bit further on the page 156 one reads as follows:
[...]
-denthes, -dentes, Dentou-, Dinti-, Denth- in der PN Aulou-denthus,
Bargi-denthes, Bessou-Dentes, Kardentes, Dentu-staina, Dinti-poris,
Denthis, Dentis, Dentheleti < ide. *g'en-to [...]
If one will be not afraid of a mistake one will laugh. It seems that
here is a big contradiction in the rules of Decev.
Once we will have an PIE *g'en which is supposed to give "zeno/seno" in
Thracian. An another time we will have an PIE *g'en-to which is supposed
to give an "dent" in Thracian. I am afraid I am a bit lost here. I guess
it doesn't matter if with "to" or not with "to" at the end, the *g'he-
should have the same treatment. But not once g'he > se/ze and once g'h >
de. But Decev means that the PIE *g'h > d shows the satem character of a
language. This was something unexpected to me thus I ask now here if a
"d" from a PIE "g'h" is a satem feature or if it is known at all an *g'h
> d in any IE languages.
alex