Re: [tied] schauen

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@...>
wrote:

> Sorry, everyone, about my responses being few and delayed. I'm

still without

> an Internet connection at home, and as for my time at work, the

less said,

> the better: I'll have to go to a series of ten MA examinations in a

moment,

> I'll chair some BA exams tomorrow, there'll be two PhD defences on
> Wednesday, etc.
>
> What worries me about Slavic x = non-Slavic sk is the paucity of
> extra-Balto-Slavic evidence. How do we know that the sk- in Baltic

is itself

> original (rather than, say, of metathetic origin < *ks-, as

apparently in

> the root of *sku- < *ks(e)u- 'shave, scrape')? We find x- ~ sk-

even within

> Slavic, as in *skrobati 'scratch' ~ *xrobotati 'make scratching

noises', but

> this is a special phenomenon, limited to expressive roots.

Southern divides the Germanic s-mobile cases with stops into pre-
Grimm (here *sk- ~ *x-) and post-Grimm (here *sk- ~ *k-). He sees
that as obviating the need to 'posit' a Nordwestblock component in
Germanic, which would take care of the latter alternation (but there
are many other reasons to do so). That Slavic alternation pair looks
like a case of the first alternation involving 'scrape'. Is it
possibly a loan?

Torsten