Re[2]: [tied] -kt- (was: Alb. katër)

At 4:19:04 PM on Tuesday, November 18, 2003, alex wrote:

> And here is the problem I got. "gh" is not "f", thus I
> thought you mean the older pronounciation for "rough"
> should have been "ruff" since you meant them as being
> homophonous.

No. The pronunciation with /f/ is an innovation. The word
had /x/ until just a few centuries ago.

> Germanic "rau", "rauch" is the cognate for english "raugh"

No. The German cognate of English <rough> is <rauh>;
<Rauch> is cognate with English <reek> 'smoke from burning
matter'.

> and derived ultimately from PIE *reu- + suffix and it
> seems to me the problem is the suffix here;

Watkins makes these two different roots: <rough> from *reu&-
'to smash, knock down, tear out, dig up, uproot', <reek>
from *reug- 'to vomit, belch; smoke, cloud'.

> Germ "raufen" = OE riepan, thus there is/was an "p" in
> english too.

I'm not aware of any OE <riepan>; do you mean <reopan>,
<repan>, <ri:pan> 'to reap' or <ri:pian> 'to ripen'? None
of these appears to have anything to do with <rough> and
<reek>.

Brian