Re: [tied] The "Mother" Problem

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Ryan" <proto-
language@...> wrote:

> > Xners déru bhert. = The man carries the wood.
> > Déru bhert xners dom héni heit. = The man who carries the wood
> > goes into the house.
>
>
> Here, I disagree categorically. I believe the pre-PIE vocalism
> was *to. Pre-IE *ta, was, I think 'dew, drip, loosen' [cf. IE *ta:-
> ; PIE *taH2-].

Wouldn't the former have been *tax in (Pre-)IE? Where do you think
the o-vocalism of *to came from?

> > Actually, come to think of it, you could be right. Why
> > use "man" when one could simply use ~"one" instead? Like this:
> >
> > To déru bher. = That (man) carries the wood.
> > Déru bher to dom héni hei. = The one who carries the wood goes
> > into the house.
>
>
> And: *déru bher to???

What do you mean? That would mean "wood-carrying one", I think.

> > Indeed it does. I actually thought only the latter, *mr.tós,
> > existed in PIE. The question is, if *mórtos IS a back-
> > formation, why does it have a full grade? There are words with
> > accented syllabic resonants (though not many), like
> > *wl.'kWos 'wolf'.
>
> One might also ask, was it earlier *'mr.-to-s?

That's possible. Still, are there any reflexes in the daughter
languages that show *'mr.tos/mórtos instead of *mr.tós?

> > That Greek word has to be from *dheh- 'put'. So, the analysis
> > would be something like *dheh to 'one who puts' (more likely
> > something like *'dah ta' at this stage) > *dheht-s 'putter' (not
> > the golf term :b ) > *dhe:s, *dhetós (lengthened grade restored
> > in Greek genitive).
>
> My preference would be for *dheH1-, 'one who puts'. Cf. Greek
> thetós, 'set, determined'.

How is that any different from my reconstruction?

> Between 'evening' and 'night' we have only different degrees of
> darkness. Clouds make the night "get dark"er. Also, if *ne/okWt-
> was _not_ 'night', what was the word for it?

There may not have been separate words for "evening" and "night".
Are there any parallels to this in other languages?

> For our ancestors, darkness was the time when the stars, which
> were regarded as souls of the dead, became visible. Daytime ghosts
> are rare.

Did *all* of our ancestors at that time regard stars as such?

- Rob