Re: [tied] Re: IE right & 10

On 8/29/04 11:50 PM, Richard Wordingham wrote:

> Well, if one starts counting on the fingers of the left hand, *dek^m
> or *dek^mt '10' might have meant something like 'right hand full'
> or 'rightmost'. With the former meaning, /mt/ _might_ be
> *met 'measure'. With the latter meaning, /m/ might be the
> superlative suffix. However, why then do we have *dek^m or *dek^mt
> and not *dek^sm or *dek^smt for '10'?

Assuming that the *-s- of *dek^s- is some kind of detachable suffix, and
that *dek^- is an acceptable combinative form, one would expect, in a
hypothetical compound with *met-, *dék^-mot- in the strong cases, with
*dek^m.t- as its weak allomoprph. Why then do we have *-(d)k^omt- in the
decadic numerals? It seems to rule out *-m(e)t-.

Piotr