On 2008-01-18 19:19, Patrick Ryan wrote:
> There is a great difference between 'a part of the vagina', implying an
> organ like the clitoris, and 'vaginal part', implying the vagina as a
> part of the uterus.
OK. A lesson in anatomy:
"The portion [of the uterus] projecting into the vagina is referred to
as the portio vaginalis or ectocervix. On average, the ectocervix is 3
cm long and 2.5 cm wide. It has a convex, elliptical surface and is
divided into anterior and posterior lips." [Wikipedia]
Can you visualise it now?
> To connect *ser-, 'sickle ('cut')' with **ser-d- betrays a lamentable
> lack of Fingerspitzengefühl. 'Coupling' makes perfect sense. In what
> sense would coition be 'cutting'?
Rubbing, actually. The general meaning he proposes for *ser- is
something like *'bring two things together in a more or less violent
way'. For *serd(H)- he suggests *'move the surface of one object
obliquely against that of another' (as suggested by the uses of the
Hittite verb, hence 'rub, wipe, slap'). But let me note, as an aside,
that Polish <rz.na,c'> means 'cut (with a knife or a saw)' or... you
know what.
All this glottogonic speculation about *ser- and its extensions is
interesing, but the central idea of the article is the identification of
reconstructed Skt. *sarda/i- 'vagina' (presumably < *sord(H)-o- 'that
which is involved in rubbing') with the Germanic word-family of
*serð-i/a- and Hitt. sartai. I think Melchert makes a pretty convincing
case.
Piotr