Nose [was: ka and k^a [was: [tied] *kW- "?"]]

Piotr Gasiorowski wrote:

> glen gordon wrote:
>
>> So for example, nominative *neh2s "nose" but
>> genitive *nasós "of the nose". Afterall, IE
>> phonotactics tell us that there would be an initial
>> syllable nasal in the genitive if it were *nh2sos
>> and it would be expressed as **n.h2sos instead!
>>
>> So... *a is needed.
>
> The word must have had an _initial_ laryngeal (index unknown), given
> the testimony of Vedic compounds. There's nothing, apart from the
> colour of the vowel, to suggest an internal *h2. *h(?)na:s- is, in my
> opinion, the optimal reconstruction.
>
> Piotr

The word needn't have an initial laryngeal, but compounds with -nHVs could
lead to similar results.

Taking this into consideration, as well as the colour of the vowel, the
correct etymology is *naH2as ~ *nH2as ~ *naH2s ~ *nH2s

It is also possible that Lat. na:sus with intervocalic -s- < *na:ssus <
*naH2s-.

See also
http://ehl.santafe.edu/cgi-bin/etymology.cgi?single=1&basename=/data/ie/piet&text_number=+807&root=config
for Nostratic evidence, esp. Altaic and Uralic, and
"References: ND 1646 *Näqas^a 'nose' (Alt-IE + Sem.)."

Grzegorz J.



___________________________________________________________
To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com