[tied] PIE prek'- ; prok' ; prk'- 'to ask'

> [mailto:cybalist@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of alexandru_mg3

> When I started this thread, you told me that this is a Slavic
> inherited word (at least this was my understanding) and you
> have derived it from the PIE *kWei-n- 'to arrange' + the *pri preffix
>
> Please correct me if I understood wrong because our 'dispute'
> is around this topic.

I wrote:
"
But *pric^ína 'cause' is Common Slavic (Ukr. <pryc^ýna>, Polish
<przyczyna>), being a deverbative from *pric^initi 'to cause', in turn from
*pri 'at' + *c^initi 'arrange; make, carry out' < PIE *kWei-n- (OInd. cinóti
'arrange', Gr. poiéo: 'I make'); it has nothing to do with PIE *prek^-.
"

I didn't write it's inherited from PIE. By "< PIE *kWei-n-" I meant the PIE
etymon of the Common Slaivc *c^initi 'arrange; make, carry out'. "*pri 'at'"
should read "Common Slavic *pri 'at'", as is clear from the context. "from
*pri + *c^initi" means more or less "was formed in Common (or Proto-)Slavic
from the lexical elements *pri and *c^initi".

> It's strange also for me that you didn't stop at least 1-minute on a
> possible derivation :
>
> PIE *prk'-no 'request, demand, raised issue' > Romanian(Substratum)
> pricina => that maybe didn't happen (we will never know) but at least
> is 100% accurate both phonetical as from a semantical point of view

Because I'm not in a position to evaluate it -- Dacian philology is out of
my competence. The semantic development 'request' -> 'cause' is something to
which I can't find a parallel off hand, though.

Sergei