From: Abdullah Konushevci
Message: 21022
Date: 2003-04-15
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Piotr Gasiorowski"]
> <piotr.gasiorowski@...> wrote:
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...>
> wrote:
> >
> > > But what we have in German seems to be from
> > > *bH&g, *bHoh1g > *bho:g, *bH&g
> > >
> > > Where do you see any Gmc **be:k- "bake"?
> >
> > It seems to have been an *o-present, cf. Gk. pHo:go: . The short
> > vocalism of the present tense in Germanic looks secondary;
> But from where? In that case of cause the long vowel of Sw. [ba:k-
> is tertiary(?), but that verb (as in Danish) is regular. Perhaps:strong
>
> 1) most linguist have proceeded from the German 'backen'?
>
> 2) in some (not ON) Gmc. languages vowels in open syllables are
> automatically long, but some linguists tend to ignore that?
>
>
> >in general,
> > the a ~ o: ~ o: ~ a ablaut is hard to explain. This class of
> > verbs contains originally different types of roots. They wererestructuring.
> > conflated in Germanic with at least some analogical
> >Forhas
> > example, *sak-an- (< *{seh2g-}; OE sacan, so:c, so:con -sacen)
> thean
> > same root structure as *{bHeh1g-}, but *far-an- (OE faran, fo:r,
> > fo:ron, -faren) seems to derive from *por- -- a different shape
> > resulting in the same ablaut pattern in Germanic.
> >
> > *bHeh1- 'bake, warm' (without the extension) is visible in OHG
> ba:en <
> > *be:-j-an- (< *bHeh1-je-).
>
> Unless that is umlauted *ba:- ? I'd hate to miss an opportunity to
> unite 'pho:gein' "roast" (ie. "prepare food") and 'phagein' "eat".
> And behind it I sense the *bH-h2- "appear, make appear" root, plus
> extension -g- that I suspect creates nomina agentis.into
>
> Furthermore, I suppose it would be possible to get Lat. 'facio'
> it, although it's now considered to be from *dHeh1- "put". Butdoes
> the semantics match?************
>
> Torsten