Re: [tied] H4 - identity? Existance?

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...> wrote:

>
>
> > There certainly was *something* that, in identical contexts, gave
> two
> > different results in Hittitle. There are many cases where we

expet

> to find a
> > laryngeal, and it just isn't there, and others where we eon't
> expect to find
> > one, and it is there. H4, if it exsted at all, was probably one

of

> the early
> > casualties in the loss of laryngeals.
> >
>
> Myself I'd get into trouble with my claim that the PIE water word
> *(H)ap-/*(H)akW- was related to PIE direction adverbs (preverbs,
> prepositions), since in the former sense Hittite has h_ap- with
> laryngeal, in the latter ap-. But if I claim they are both loans

and

> wanderwörter, the trouble goes away; they might have been loaned
> from separate donors.
>
>
> Torsten
>

I really doubt this fact in relation with the 'water' word: knowing
the kW/a,o > p is a phonetic transformation that happens in many
languages (see as example Ancient Greek, Celtic-P dialects and maybe
also Romanian ex. quatro~patru '4') this seems for me an internal PIE
evolution that maybe happened in PIE Pre-Historic times

Something like:
*h2ekW/{-o(H),(H)o,-(e)h2,-(e)h3} > *h2ep- and h2ekW- otherwise

Because the root h2ep- 'water' could be identified also in some
Celtic and Latin words (ex. amnis etc..) seems not to be a PIE
(later) dialectal transformation (at least is not related to the PIE
dialectal split taht generated the known branches)

Marius