Re: [tied] root definition( it was Re: Slavic *go~sI (it was Re: hu

tolgs001 wrote:

>>> constructed after the same model like: bâz-, fâs-, hâs-,
>>> pâs-, sâs-, hâs-, mâr-, hâr-, zâng-, zâz-,
>>> hâts-, bâj-,bâlb-, etc. all presenting there an "CâC"
>>> I guess you can get the idea, should I develop?
>>
>> I don't see any idea, only a list of ASCII patterns you call
>> by the audacious name "roots".
>
> At least bâlb- might be seen as balb- in Lat. balbu(lu)s
> "stutterer, stammerer."
>
>> Marius
>
> George

for me a root is word, an interjection which is the basis for deriving
new words which contains it. Is this definition wrong in your eyes?
Thus there is no list of ASCII patterns called audacious "roots" but
they are simply roots:

bâz-: bâzâi, bâziâilã, bâzâire, bâzã, bâzâit
sâs-: sâsâi, sâsâiala, sâsâire, sâsâit
fâs-: fâsâi, fâsâiala, fâsâire, fâsâit
etc

Thus from an interjection we have a family of words; verbs, nouns,
adjectives etc. Why should be wrong whith the interjections being called
roots in this case?


Alex