From: Miguel Carrasquer
Message: 42036
Date: 2005-11-10
>> <kis> obviously can't be o-grade. It's an irregular form*kWis
>> without palatalization (analogical after <kas>, and other
>> pronouns with -i-/-o- alternation)
>
>***
>Patrick:
>
>I guess you mean PIE *ki-s
>>karo:ti is somehow derived from kr.no:ti. The exact path is
>> >before *a: (*aH) - ka:s-
>> >
>> >When I see imperative kuru, I suspect that karo:ti may be the result of
>> >zero-grade as well: *kWréuti > *k(u)róti > *k-a-róti
>> >
>> >Is that basically how you see it?
>
>
>***
>Patrick:
>
>You did not comment on karoti above. Could you please?
>> >********************cé:s.t.ati, cyávate:, *ke:i- p. 539
>> >
>> >> >PIE *k produces OI <k>;
>> >>
>> >> Which was palatalized to <c> before front vowels and /j/.
>> >
>> >I have gone through the *k section in Pokorny for initials, and can find
>> >only
>> >
>> >candati, *(s)kendeti (metathesized from *(s)ked-n-)
>> >camara, *kem-
>>
>> You missed a few: cé:s,t,ati, cyávate:, ca:s.a, có:pati,
>> perhaps more.
>
>***
>Patrick:
>
>I am still unable to find these forms in Pokorny. Could you please supply
>the PIE forms?
>***In the sense that Polish <sz> and Mandarin <sh> are
>
>> >
>> >Of course. I am used to writing <S> for <s> (from the time that esh could
>> >not easily be inserted into email)
>>
>> There are two eshes in Sanskrit: <s'> and <s.>.
>
>***
>Patrick:
>
>How totally novel to call two letters by the same name!
>
>I thought <s.> was a retroflex. Am I wrong?