Re: again Slavic "dragU"

My intention was semantic development, so you and Mr. Vidal could
<drage volje> `with free will' (free, friend, Friday are all derived
from PIE root *pri:- `to love', as are Lat. <amicus> and <amor>
related, as well as Albanian <dashamir> `friend' and
<dashuri> `love') object from <nevolje> to <nedraga> and for me it is
all correct.
I try to cite Derksen as correctly as possible, bur it seems that you
moderators like to make confusion from everything and it's up to you
how you chopped messages and how you read them. At last, I didn't
care about that.
I try to find some kind of phonetical developmet from *dHrougH-o- >
*drugU `friend'and to reconstruct some possible form *dHrogH-ú >
*dorgU for `dear'.
That's all folks!

Konushevci

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Sergejus Tarasovas"
<S.Tarasovas@...> wrote:

> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Abdullah Konushevci"
> <a_konushevci@...> wrote:
>
> > > >*do:rgú 'dear'(OCHS dragú 'id.', South-Slavic <drag>)
> > >
> > > The *o is short.
> > [AK]
> > I haven't invent this form. You may found it in Rick Derksen's
> > Dictionary, who I think is one of the best scholar.
>
> Derksen uses the Kortlandtian notation, in which a macron is put
> automatically on the first component of a word-initial functional
> diphthong if a word belongs to the accent paradigm "c" (mobile).

The

> notation is based on the highly idiosyncratic Kortlandt's views on
> the Common Slavic prosody, far from being universally accepted; so
> it's misleading to use it communicating one's ideas outside Leiden
> University. Derksen is a Kortlandt's disciple, so no wonder he

adopts

> his views, but that doesn't automatically make him one of the best
> scholars yet.
>
> > There is no *u in PS *dorgas, so no.
> >
> > [AK]
> > See Derksen again.
> > >
>
> What do you mean exactly? Derksen (at least at

iiasnt.leidenuniv.nl)

> reconstructs Proto-Balto-Slavic *dorg-o- for Slavic *dorgU (he
> doesn't give the PIE form) and PIE *dHrougHo- for *drugU.
>
> Sergei