[tied] Re: illyrian lexicon or inventory

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

> On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 17:01:16 +0100, alex <alxmoeller@...> wrote:
>
> >I suposse there is too the simply *(j)azU in Slavic meaning

too "lake"

> >is it?
> >which should be the PIE root of it?
>
> Pokorny: *eg^hero- "Landsee"?
>
> The questionmark is not there without reason. Besides the Baltic-

Slavic

> equation OPr assaran, Lith. e~z^eras, Latv. ezers, OCS (j)ezero,

Russ.

> ozero, which makes the word proto-Balto-Slavic, not proto-Indo-

European,

> the rest of the lemma is doubtful.
> Slavic *e^zU "Kanal; Wasserwehr; Fischzaun" must be from *eg^- not

*eg^h-,

> so cannot be related (I would think the same applies to Baltic

*ez^ya:

> "Grenzstreifen"). Likewise, Pannonian Oseria~tes, Grk. Akhéro:n

cannot

> come from *eg^h- either.
>
> =======================
> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
> mcv@...

************
Dear Miguel,
Pannonian _Oseriates_, taking into consideration other Illyrian
tribes names, like: Autariates, Dokleates, Dalmates, Dardaniates,
Labeates etc., should be segmented as Oseri-at-es, where -at is
plural ending, like in Albanian: çikat (sing. çikë 'girl, virgin'),
vashat (sing. vashë 'girl'), fushat (sing. fushë 'field'), pusat
(sing. pus 'well'), lisat (sing.lis 'oak'), etc. It is worth to
notice that palatal *g^h- yields spirant /s/, that is another
argument of the thesis that Illyrian was satem too.

Konushevci