Re: *a/*a: ablaut

From: Patrick Ryan
Message: 52895
Date: 2008-02-12

I think we should all be aware that *p_(:)d- has meanings besides 'foot':
'go, fall, place, floor'.

These may or may not have had the same vocalism as 'foot'.


Patrick


----- Original Message -----
From: "fournet.arnaud" <fournet.arnaud@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 3:21 PM
Subject: Re: Re: [tied] Re: *a/*a: ablaut


>
>
> > What about words like sacer-dos
> > where dhoH1 "doer" is primary -o-
>
> What do you understand by "primary -o-"? Even if <sacerdo:s> contained
> *dHoh1-, the fundamental form of the corresponding verb would still be
> *dHeh1-. But the analysis is unlikely, as the compositional form of
> 'doer/maker' in Latin is -fex. <sacerdo:s> is more plausibly
> *sakro-doh3-t-s 'the giver of the sacred'.
>
> ==============
> ok
> "primary" may be circular.
>
> I meant it is basically /o/
> not something else.
>
> As for sacerdo:s
> Watkins is ok with *dh_H1
> To sanctify. 1. Suffixed form *sak-ro-. a. sacred, sacristan, sexton;
> consecrate, execrate, from Latin sacer, holy, sacred, dedicated; b.
> compound
> *sakro-dht-, "performer of sacred rites" (*-dht-, doer; see dh-).
> sacerdotal, from Latin sacerds, priest. 2. Nasalized form *sa-n-k-. saint,
> sanctum; corposant, sacrosanct, sanctify, from Latin sancre (past
> participle
> snctus), to make sacred, consecrate. (Pokorny sak- 878.)
>
> But I will not hide myself
> behind somebody else
> Be he Watkins.
>
> Your opinion "more plausibly", "unlikely" "would be"
> You are not proving anything
> but expressing your own subjectivity.
>
> Arnaud
> ================
> > or phôs "light" < *bhoH2-
> > monosyllabic word with nothing to influence
> > the vowel.
>
> Well, it belongs to a class of monosyllabic root nouns with *o in the
> strong cases. Synchronically in PIE, it's morphology that determines the
> choice of the vowel in this case (whatever the historical explanation).
> The point is that the *o of, say, *po:d-s, acc. *pod-m., pl. *pod-es is
> morphophonologically related to *e in gen. *ped(o)s or in derivatives
> like *ped-o-m 'standing-place'. It isn't an independent vowel.
> ==============
>
> What about Greek words :
> bous "cattle" < *gwow
> lô "will" < *wloH1
> ops "voice" < *wokw
> proks "deer" < *prok- "speckled"
>
> Arnaud
> ================
>
> > or pot-(ere) "to be able"
>
> There is no "potere" in Latin, only <possum> (< potis sum) and <potior>
> (<poti:ri:>). It's true that the *o of *potis looks apophonically
> stable, but such examples are vanishingly rare and it's possible that
> the absence of *pet- is an accidental attestation gap due to the early
> generalisation of strong vocalism.
> Piotr
>
> ===============
>
> "once a phoneme, always a phoneme"
> *vanishingly* rare is subjective.
>
> I am still waiting for a clear case of *CaC-vowel
> constrasting with *CeC-vowel or *CoC-vowel.
>
> Arnaud
>
> ==================
>
>
>
>
>
>