[tied] Re: Foot/below

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:

> On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 12:24:51 +0000, tgpedersen
> <tgpedersen@...> wrote:


> >> In any case, the word did not originally start with *p-, but
> >> with b-, and a derivation from Latin/Romance pedem/*pEde is
> >> impossible (that would have given Basque *bede, not behe).
> >
> >In that case, the Galician/Portuguese constructions might be
> >substratal
>
> Why? They are completely normal Romance constructions (al
> pie de la letra, au pied de la lettre, etc). I can see
> nothing "substratal" about any of it.
>
>

I'll concede that. I'm just puzzled as to why Löpelmann singles out
Galician and Portuguese.


BTW the fact that pe-/be- is used as a prefix as well as a suffix
indicates that it was active both in Basque's present SOV period as
in the supposed very early SVO period.

Torsten