Re: [tied] IIr 2nd Palatalisation (was: PIE voiceless aspirates)

ADDITION

----- Original Message -----
From: "Patrick Ryan" <proto-language@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, November 11, 2005 6:28 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] IIr 2nd Palatalisation (was: PIE voiceless aspirates)


>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Richard Wordingham" <richard.wordingham@...>
> To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Friday, November 11, 2005 8:38 AM
> Subject: Re: [tied] IIr 2nd Palatalisation (was: PIE voiceless aspirates)
>
>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Ryan" <proto-language@...>
> wrote:
>
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Miguel Carrasquer" <mcv@...>
> > > On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 01:57:21 -0600, Patrick Ryan
> > > <proto-language@...> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>
> > First, there is nothing but imaginative thinking to connect ca:Sa
> to
> > *kel-(so-). It is of questionable value to prove anything. In
> addition,
> > every one of the other nine Old Indian derivations of this *kel-
> have <k>
> > (<kalká>). Nine *o- or zero-grades?
>
> Look to Iranian for the e-grades:
>
> "npers. c^arma `Schimmel', kurd. c^erme `weis|' (: schweiz. helm)"
>
>
> ***
> Patrick:
>
> But how do you reconcile that with Avestan <kasu-> from (supposedly)
> *k^ak-?
>
> ***
>
> > PIE roots are *CVC. Thus the root for cRtáti is *ker-; this is
> acknowledged
> > (almost) by Pokorny when he refers to 3. *(s)ker- under the *kert-
> listing.
> > In view of an attested kRNátti under this root, I suggest a
> prototype for
> > cRtáti would probably be better reconstructed as *skRtéti.
>
> Except that unsoftened PIE *sk gives Sanskrit /sk/ (or /k/) e.g. the
> derivatives of PE *ska(m)bH (e.g. skabhna:ti, skabhno:ti 'support')
> and softened *sk gives Sanskrit /ch/ e.g. _chyati_ 'cut' from
> Pokorny's *ske:i.
>
>
> ***
> Patrick:
>
> Yes, of course. Here we see <ch>; but what about <códati> from *(s)keud-?
>
> ***
>
>
> > I do not think cópati can be very probative in view of kúpyati and
> kopáyati
> > from this root. Perhaps we are dealing with *skéupeti.
>
> The combination of cópati, kúpyati and kopáyati looks like a lovely
> example of the e-grade, zero grade and o-grade of **keup. It's
> partly spoilt by the apparent parallel existence of **kap.
>
> How does the Sanskrit _kap_ root arise from PIE *kew&p? Wouldn't
> *kwep have yielded **kvap?
>
> ***
> Patrick:
>
> First, I doubt seriously <*kapi>; it is, after all, "unbelegt".
>
> But in view of Egyptian k(3)p, 'burn incense' (probably better *kjp), I
> think Greek kapnós, 'smoke', and OI <kapilá> are more likely to be derived
> from a PIE form like *kaHp- (**ka[:]p-).

ADDED: We might, for esample, look at Latin capedo:.

>
> We do have <kópa->, which is as likely to have been an *e-grade as an
> *o-grade. Would you agree? If we say it is <k> because of *o-grade, we are
> chasing our tails around the tree.
>
> As we see, OI <c> can, apparently, also be a response to PIE *ske- (I
> would say *sk^V). I am beginning to wonder if <ch> does not tell us that
> the PIE form should be *sk^(h)-?
>
>
> ***
>
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/GP4qlB/TM
> --------------------------------------------------------------------~->
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>