From: Miguel Carrasquer
Message: 33230
Date: 2004-06-14
>--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:That's a proper name (placename, I think). Etxa- + -larr.
>> On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 11:55:55 +0000, tgpedersen
>> <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
>>
>> >Löpelmann:
>> >ets^e "house"
>> >
>> >because of the compounds
>> >ets^alondo
>> >ets^alain
>> >ets^alte
>> >he posits an original root
>> >*ets^al-
>> >variants
>> >*ets^ar-/*ets^er-
>>
>> etxalte is a local variant of etxalde "village house, own
>> house" from etxe + alde "side, near". I can't find
>> <etxalain> in Azkue, but a suffix *-ain does not exist.
>
>Sorry, it was <ets^alarr>
>> Lapurdian etxalondo means the same as etxalde, and isIn any case etxe cannot come from etxal-
>> clearly composed of etxe + ondo "side, near", which should
>> have given *etxaondo. Perhaps this was transformed to
>> etxalondo by analogy of <etxalde>.
>
>Perhaps -> In any case ?
>>In any case, there isAll palatalized suffixes are probably derived from earlier
>> ansolutely no reason to posit an original root
>> *etxal-/*etxar-, and no possible way that such a root could
>> have developed into general Basque <etxe> (combining form of
>> course <etxa->).
>>
>> Now a pre-Basque word *(t)egi "house", combining form
>> *(t)eg-, when combined with the diminutive suffix -xe would
>> have given *(t)eg-xe > etxe regularly.
>
>Trask says all palatalising suffixes are recent. <Etxe> isn't.
>What seems odd to me is that <etxe>, the supposed direct descendantIt doesn't mean "roof". Azkue gives tegi as:
>of the Celtic word means "house", while <tegi>, the reconstituted
>combining form somehow has reverted to the original IE sense
>of "roof". Have you also discovered how that happened?