Re: [tied] Terminology (Re: Piotr-)

From: alex
Message: 25426
Date: 2003-08-30

----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Wordingham" <richard.wordingham@...>
To: <>
Sent: Saturday, August 30, 2003 12:49 AM
Subject: [tied] Terminology (Re: Piotr-)

--- In, "tolgs001" <> wrote:
> >We discussed this long ago, c.
> ><>.
> >
> >Richard.
> Can "*dentu" in your opinion interpreted as
> an equivalent of Lat. "gens"? If so, why?

I don't know what *dentu- is extracted from, so I can't comment on
that aspect. As to the phonetics, I'm surmising a development as in
Albanian, g^ > ð, though it could also be an affricate; I'm not sure
how, for example, /dz/ would have been rendered in Greek. I don't
like the voicing, but I don't think it's impossible. For example,
the palatals could heve become fricatives before a Grimm's law shift
in Thracian. I'd prefer to see more parallels.

As to the stem, well Gothic has _tunþus_ for 'tooth', so I don't see
any problem with the ending.


Deçev's view here is as follow: g'en-to > dentu im Thracian; thus
/g'/>/d/ is the proof for the satem character in this case.
He sees too that Durosteron should be a derivative of "g'her" (
umfassen, einfassen), here being too the same proof for the satem
character of thracian.
I guess this is a very interesting example since in Rom. the PIE root is
stil preserved in the very archaic form and the Alb. has the form with
PIE *g'her > Alb. dorë (hand)
pie *g'her > Rom. ghearã ( claw, but figurative used as "hand")