Re: [tied] *pYerkW+

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

>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Sean Whalen <stlatos@> wrote:
>
> > Why would all PIE words ending in Cnu show some
> > without the nasal?
>
> Are there any examples of this other than the three you've mentioned?

I've given 4 possible examples in *(n)u+. There aren't any others
in *nu+ I'm sure about, but it's not very common and there was
metathesis of most single C+n > N+C, so it seems like this is as much
ev. as I'm likely to find.

Of course, this is part of a broad rule, so C-ry/rw/ly/my/etc. would
be fine. Also, comparatives show C-nyos > C-i-yos (among other changes).

> > Why does Celtic directly show a word both with and
> > without a nasal but otherwise exactly the same in form
> > and meaning?
>
> I take it that <ti:rim> is the word with a nasal; what is the word
> without one,

I first wrote "OIr tír / tírim" in:

How about * t(e)rsnu+s t(e)rsuw+ 'dry (so of people
= thirsty)' > Goth. þaursus; Khowar thrus.nù;
metathesis nu > mi in Arm. & Celtic so OIr tír /
tírim; > verb in Arm. t'ars^amim 'wither'.

> and what is your source for it?

I don't know where I first saw it, but it's in C. D. Buck's
_Dictionary of Selected Synonyms_ under 15.84 'dry'.