Re[4]: [tied] Latinus geminus

At 7:47:43 PM on Saturday, February 23, 2008, Patrick Ryan
wrote:

> From: "Brian M. Scott" <BMScott@...>

[Quoting Hamp:]

>> It seems to me that Schwartz is clearly correct (p. 200)
>> in attributing to *g'em- the primary meaning of 'pairing,
>> coupling', which is reflected in Rig-Vedic <vi-já:man->
>> 'paired, twin' and Latin <geminus>. The development of
>> the sense 'twin' for Irish <emon> from the base *yem-
>> 'grasp together' is, as Schwarz implies, quite another
>> matter.

> <snip>

>> The reference is to Martin Schwartz, Monumentum H.S. Nyberg,
>> Acta Iranica II. 1975. 195-211.

>> Later he glosses *g'em- 'pair, couple; copulate, mate,
>> consummate a marriage', adding 'I have been present at
>> Balkan wedding feasts where this act has been ritually
>> attested to by the institutional waving -- with some
>> embarrassment and not with obscenity -- of a blood-stained
>> cloth'.

> It seems to me that someone is forever trying to muddy the
> waters as I suspect Schwartz is doing here.

Note that the gloss 'pair, couple; copulate, mate,
consummate a marriage' is Hamp's, not Schwartz's.

> IMHO, based on etymology, *g^em- is simply 'copulate':

Brian