From: Piotr Gasiorowski
Message: 46987
Date: 2007-01-17
> If *bHag- 'to divide' is with a- and we don't have any ablaut forms<bHa:gá-> can be regarded as an o-grade with Brugmannian lengthening (<
> or a trace of a laryngeal, it cannot be considered a PIE word, but a
> later loan...
>
> On the other hand, without the a-issue, the root fits perfectly the
> PIE pattern "CVC" and in addition the Sanskrit derived words and even
> the Slavic ones (derivation in -to for 'rich'), considered later
> loans, could be completly reconstructed based on the PIE suffixes.
>
> In addition the semantic derivation "God" <- "Divider" <- "To
> Divide" present in Greek /daimo:n/ too, show us a common (PIE?)
> semantic evolution.
>
> Viewing all these, could I ask you : finally "where we are" in this
> case with this root? Is from PIE, or not?