Re: Latinus geminus

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
<miguelc@...> wrote:

>
> On Sat, 23 Feb 2008 15:45:08 -0000, "alexandru_mg3"
> <alexandru_mg3@...> wrote:
>
> >
> >I think that Latin geminus and Skt. yama'- reflects a PIE g'em-
> >
> >But I saw that Mattasovic (and not only) linked these forms with

PIE

> >*yem-(o-no) > OIr. emon
> >
> >On the other hand I know that PIE *y- (yekwr-) > Latin i-/j-

(/iekur/)

> >
> >So I'm confused here.
>
> PIE *yem- regularly gives Skt. yamás, etc. Latin g- cannot
> come from *y-, but in this case, semantics usually takes
> preference over phonetics. In Pokorny, the Anlaut of Latin
> <geminus> is explained as `hat wohl das g- von der Wurzel
> gem- `greifen, zusammenpressen' (oben S. 368 f. ) bezogen'.
>
> =======================
> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
> miguelc@...

Thanks, Miguel.

But if I add here the Baltic form reflected in Lettish jumis 'a
double ear of corn' (and Jumis - the God) => following the same path
that : "semantics usually takes preference over phonetics" , I think
that the phonetic puzzle will be complete

In this case I need to put away : Lettish jumis as from *yeuh- 'to
join , to mingle' => but the semantism of 'the duality' somehow will
dissapear ...

And once oing this why not to put together regularly : Latin geminus
with Skt. yam'a- as from the root g^em- ?

Doing all these : only Celtic *yem-o-no would remain isolated.

Viewing this: What is your 'preference' here ?

You would try to put 'all together' or to keep outside some?

Thanks again,
Marius