Re: *Twah-

From: tgpedersen
Message: 34338
Date: 2004-09-28

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
>
> > Oh, it might be just an accident, but in Czech, there is a strange
> > expression, considered to be of onom.-expr. origin, which I
> consider very
> > similar:
> >
> > c^vaxat (or c^va:xat, c^vaxtat) "to squelch, to slush, to splash
> about"
> > (influenced by ca:kat of sim. meaning), to bath or bathe
(dimin.)"
> and it is
> > also strictly used in connection with the body.
> >

Actually, Danish and Swedish have also 'tvætte', 'tvätta' of the same
meaning, supposedly from a noun *twak-ti- (Danish to- (but Møller
writes to:-), Swedish två-)? The -t- of 'c^vaxtat' is unexpected too,
I believe (the little Czech I know is from Janác^ek librettos), as is
the initial c^v- ? 'ca:kat' vs. 'c^va:xat' is reminiscent of the the
Da/Sw contrast to-/två- although Danish has (but not consistently)
*wa(:)- > *wo(:)-/*wå(:)- > *o: . Two separate loans of the same
root? One more thing: Schrijver's 'language of geminates', which I
would identify with Nordwestblock, often alternates -k- ~ -kk- ~ -nk-
(and similarly for the other stops), thus an appearent n-infix can
occur also in non-verbs.

Torsten