08-07-03 21:23, alex wrote:
> For the *excutulare, the root cannot be Latin "quatio:" , I
> am too wrong? If not, then which is the root?
Not exactly <quat->, but its shorter variant <-cut->, as in Classical
<-cutio:, -cutere, -cussi:, -cussus> 'shake, strike':
<de:-cutio:> 'shake down, knock off'
<ex-cutio:> 'shake out, strike off'
<in-cutio:> 'dash, strike into, inspire sb with (a feeling)'
<per-cutio:> 'pierce' (cf. <percussion>)
<re-(per-)cutio:> 'cause to rebound' (cf. <repercussion>)
<dis-cutio:> 'disperse, shake to pieces' (cf. <discussion>)
But, Alex, I have this this odd feeling of deja-vu. All this has been
"discussum" before. Check the archives. And put down the whip: the poor
ol' nag is dead.
Piotr