Re: [tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory?

From: Piotr Gasiorowski
Message: 32145
Date: 2004-04-21

21-04-2004 17:38, Miguel Carrasquer wrote:

> A dedicated soundlaw *ph2t- > st- would be a bit too ad hoc.

There remains the possibility that the etymology is wrong. Kortlandt
(1982, _Folia Linguistica Historica_ III/1 pp. 25-27) rejects it:

"This connection cannot be maintained. It does not seem possible to
separate _stryjI_ 'uncle' (ORu. also _strUjI_) from Lith. stru`jus
'uncle', OLith. _stru:jus_ (Dauks^a) 'grandfather, old man', OIr.
_sruith_ 'old, honourable'. The comparison with Skt. _pitrvya`-_ [sic!
PG] and OHG _fatureo_ < *_fadurwia-_ is fallacious because the
corresponding Slavic form would be **_tIrvl'I_."

That's also Pokorny's choice (see *stru- 'grey-haired, old', with
references to Trautmann and Vasmer).

Piotr