Re: [tied] Re: IE prefix "*s"

19-12-03 22:40, Miguel Carrasquer wrote:

> The s- of super- is I think analogical after <sub> "under". But where did
> that s- come from? EIEC (under "UP") mentions a *s-h4upó "underneath" Lat.
> sub "under", animalia suppa "animals (on all fours)" [..], Arm hup "near",
> ToB spe "near", Hitt. suppala- "animal". The only reference given is GI
> (Gamkrelidze & Ivanov) p. 104.

How about folk-etymological contamination with *swep-/*sup- 'sleep'?

> I prefer Pokorny's explanation *<ex-upo> > <sub>. "Out from under", "out
> from behind" et sim. are concepts that merit their own preposition in a
> number of languages (e.g. Polish <spod> and my favourite, <zza>).

Yes. My only problem with it is that the <sup-> group is isolated among
the Italic prepositions/preverbs. Polish has <spod> 'from under' as well
as <znad>/<sponad> 'from above', <sprzed> 'from before' as well as
<zza>/<spoza> 'from behind', and of course the simplex pronouns <pod>
'under', <nad> 'above', <przed> 'before, in front of' and <za> 'behind'.
Latin, however, lacks not only forms like *sinfra: 'from undeneath' <
*ex-infra: but even s-less *<ub>, *<uper>, etc.

Piotr