Re: [tied] Latin 'twenty'

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:

> On Fri, 03 Oct 2003 22:48:51 +0200, Piotr Gasiorowski
> <piotr.gasiorowski@...> wrote:
>
> >03-10-03 22:05, Rob wrote:
> >
> >> I hope I'm not bringing up something already established, but I

was

> >> wondering what your opinions on the etymology of Latin vi:ginti
> >> ("twenty") are. Personally, it seems to me that vi:ginti is the
> >> result of PIE *dwi(s) kmtih2 'twice ten.'
> >
> >You're on the right track. The actual reconstruction is *wi-(d)

k^m.tih1

>
> Greek eíkosi/Fíkati (*ewi:km.ti) points to *h1wi-h1k^m.tíh1

(presumably

> from *dwi-dk^m.tíh1 with twice *d > *h1).
>
> >a compound in which the second element is the _dual_ of *dek^m.t-

'10'

> >(hence the ending *-ih1). Whether *wi- is really a simplified
> >(dissimilated?) variant of *dwi-, opinions vary. It may be. If it

is,

> >the assumption of the adverb 'twice' is not necessary: *dwi- is

simply

> >the normal form of 'two' in compounds.
>

Møller (see

http://www.angelfire.com/rant/tgpedersen/II.html

) posited a d-preformative (known from Semitic?)

http://www.angelfire.com/rant/tgpedersen/d-preformative.html

, interesting in light of Manansala's claim of bifid boats, and of IE
preoccupation with twins and horses.

Torsten