Re: [tied] schauen

From: Petr Hrubis
Message: 33259
Date: 2004-06-18

That's it, Sergei, I didn't want to mention the Lith counterparts to let Piotr find his own explanation himself.
 
Piotr, as soon as you find any better explanation, please, let us know. We are hungry to know it.
 
Petusek
 
P.S.: Reading my comments, I realize they might sound a bit ironical - they have never meant to be, Piotr. I really am hungry to know what you think about the x-out-of-sk issue.
----- Original Message -----
From: Sergejus Tarasovas
To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, June 18, 2004 10:40 AM
Subject: RE: [tied] schauen

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sergejus Tarasovas [mailto:S.Tarasovas@...]

> Taking into account Lith. <skujà> 'id.', isn't it tempting at
> least in this case to derive PSl. *x- from *sk-?

Also OCS xleNbI 'waterfall' and Lith. (Z^em.) sklem~bti 'slide aside, slide
down' (an example from DLKZ^: kàd sklem~be: roge~le:s, võs neapvir~tome
'when a sledge slid aside, we all but got upset').

Sergei