Re: [tied] Re: IE thematic presents and the origin of their themati

>From: "Rob" <magwich78@...>

>--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...>
>wrote:
> > Rob wrote:
> >
> > > Is there any verbal root which has both forms? (I ask because,
> > > so far, it seems that the answer is "no". For example, there is
> > > no word *bhe:r to contrast with *bho:r.)
> >
> > Off the top of my head, I could quote Gk. sko:ps 'scops owl, _Otus
> > scops_' < *spo:k^-s vs. *spe:k^-s 'watcher, observer'. Animal names
> > meaning 'a critter that frequently ..." tend to have o-vocalism,
> > cf. Gk. pto:ks 'hare'.
>
>Yet does *spe:ks mean 'one who is watching now' or 'one who
>frequently watches'? Is it even meaningful to make such a
>distinction here?

Yes, absolutely. The frequentative was marked by -sk- . spe:ks-sk- would be
"one who frequently/repetitively watches. the -sk- suffix was still active
in several anatolian languages.

>Are there any other roots with both apparent types?
>
> > > I would rather say that those two forms were coined at different
> > > stages in IE's development, *dxWt�:r being older and *d�xWto:r
> > > being younger.
> >
> > Based on what?
>
>Based on different stages of the language, as I said. There may have
>been some semantic differentiation along the lines of what you were
>saying, but I think what set things in motion was the desire to keep
>derived forms "close to their roots".
>
> > To my mind, the distinction is parallel to that found in
> > *p&2- t�:r 'father' (< *'natural, constant protector') vs.
> > *p�h2s-to:r 'herdsman, shepherd' (< 'protecting now and then, when
> > on duty'), with durative *//peh2-// vs. punctual *//pe:h2-s-//.
>
>Yet I thought long vowels were not subject to laryngeal "coloring",
>so we should expect *pe:sto:r here. Of course, that is exactly what
>we don't see.
>
>On another note, I do agree that *pex- 'protect' seems to be a root
>durative and so would form a sigmatic aorist *pe:xs-.
>
>- Rob
>
>