Re: [tied] Re: *pot-

On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 10:08:05 +0100, Piotr Gasiorowski
<gpiotr@...> wrote:

I forgot to reply to this.

>On 05-02-17 00:12, Miguel Carrasquer wrote:
>
>> I was thinking that the main effect of the reduction would
>> have been to reduce simplex 3-syllable potnia to 2-syllable
>> -potnja. While the cluster -tn- is not reduced in Greek,
>> the cluster -tnj-, for all we know, *is*, to -jn-. I'm
>> pretty sure there are no counterexamples.
>
><potna> (var. of <potnia>) seems to be one

That's the same word. Different dialectal developments
don't count :-)

>, whereas <ekHidna> may
>illustrate the parallel treatment of -dnj- (stop remains, glide goes).

Are we sure it's not ekHi:dna? The normal treatment after
/i/ is to lengthen the vowel (ekHidnia > ekHijdna =
ekHi:dna).

>It looks as if the *-tn- had undergone irregular simplification in
><despoina> after all. Cf. the very early reduction of *-pt- to -p- in
>compounds like <aigupios> (cf. Skt. r.ji-pyá-), not found in simplex words.

-pio-/-pya- from *peth2- "fly"?

If it had been reduced even further, -pt- (< *pj-) would
have been restored in Greek...

=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...