Re: [tied] kentum and satem

We know for sure the meaning of Thracian <-diza>, for example, and its
derivation from PIE *dHeig^Ho- is practically self-evident. Note that
in this word a non-front vowel follows, so the palatalisation is
purely Satemic. Even if we exclude uncertain etymologies (like
<re:sos> from *(h3)re:g^-, which might or might not be correct) and
ambiguous cases of Thracian <s>, <z> before front vowels (like
<-zenis> from *-g^enh1e:s, cf. Gk. -gene:s), some irreducible evidence
in favour of Thracian being Satem remains; e.g. esb- < *h1ek^wo-, (the
River) Arzos < *h2arg^o- (a common hydronymic element).

Piotr

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alex" <alxmoeller@...> wrote:
> Piotr Gasiorowski wrote:
> > The falling together of *k and *kW can occur outside the Satem group
> > as well (Tocharian is a good example) and therefore cannot be
> > regarded as a distinctly Satem feature. Nor does the common-or-garden
> > variety of positional palatalisation (before front vowels) count as
> > Satem, and I believe what we have in Phrygian is basically just that.
> >
> > Piotr
>
>
> I guess you made a good point here. Any examples of Thracian words where
> _we know_ what the Thracian word meant and which shows a true satem
> character ? I could not find any . You eventually?
>
> alex