*pot-

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

> On Tue, 08 Feb 2005 16:20:28 +0000, Rob
> <magwich78@...> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...>
> >wrote:
> >
> >> Is the -t- of Latin 'potis' etc an agent suffix?
> >>
> >> Torsten
> >
> >Perhaps. The word is certainly morphologically complex -- I'd say
> >either *pot-i-s or *po-t-i-s.
>
> *pot-i-s is not very complex. It an i-stem (in my opinion,
> an *in-stem) based on *pot-. I see no basis for an analysis
> *po-t-.
>

pan "lord" Polish

and

dés-poina "mistress of the house,
female ruler" Greek
pótnia "mistress of the house" Greek

Why is that, if -t- is not a suffix?


Torsten