Re: [tied] Daimo:n 'Divider' <-> Bog 'Divider' too?

On 2007-01-16 20:15, alexandru_mg3 wrote:

> I know, of course, this transformation. I have asked for similar
> examples of such Iranians loans in Slavic reflecting Iranian a >
> Slavic o (=>so loans older than sec V-VI max. : Sl. a > Sl. o)

*xvorU 'sick' : Av. xVara- 'wound' etc., perhaps xome^storU 'hamster' :
Av. hamae:star 'opponent' (with puzzling semantics but a perfect formal
match).

Loans taken later than that may still have Slavic /o/ substituted for
foreign /a/, cf. Lat. castellum > OHG kastel > *kostelU (> Pol., Cz.
'church' words), just because even after the change of *[a] > *[o] in
Slavic dialects *o was the only short/lax non-front open vowel.

> So again we would deal here with a loan earlier than g > k in
> Tocharian too...Do you know other Iranians loans in Tocharian
> reflecting Iranian g > Tocharian k?

What could it be borrowed as if Tocharian lacked voiced obstruents? It
needn't be a real sound change; it may just as well be substitution, cf.
Skt. Buddha- --> PToch. *p&t- (Kim 1999).

> Yes. Thanks for the other example.
> But maybe laryngeal on one side and no laryngeal on the other? Where
> would be the contradiction?

The known reflexes can be explained perfectly well without any
laryngeals, so why stuff them into the root?

Piotr