Re: PIE -*C-presents

On 2008-02-20 01:09, Patrick Ryan wrote:

> I assumed the question mark referred to the meaning "anstrengen" not to the
> validity of the root itself. Is that wrong?

The root itself is a controversial reconstruction, based on very little
material.

> I admit the semantics are strained but, of course, if they were less
> difficult, the question would not be coming up at all, would it?

Well, by contrast, *h2aug- and *h2weg-s- (*h2weks-) have practically the
same meaning and are amply supported by examples from various branches
of IE.

> Is not the LIV "emendment" rather capricious?

It seems better supported than Pokorny's reconstruction.

> I suspect both of these roots may eventually reflect a meaning like
> 'huffing
> and puffing', in the first, indicating 'tiredness', and 'exertion'; in the
> second, on the outward sign of 'huffing': 'swelling up through more than
> normal inhalation'.

This is the kind of connection that can be made between anything and
anything else. If 'strong' = 'exhausted' then, I suppose, 'fire' =
'water' (an original meaning like 'alcohol'?).

Piotr