From: Patrick Ryan
Message: 54704
Date: 2008-03-06
----- Original Message -----
From: "Patrick Ryan" <proto-language@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 2:15 AM
Subject: Re: [tied] Rayim
Lest readers think I am angling for an "A" from the Professor, I do differ
with one small part of Piotr's comments below: I do not think the IIr words
for 'give' derive from *re:(H)- but rather from a related *re:-, the long
vowel of which was original rather than occasioned by the former presence of
a 'laryngeal'.
This *re:- means, primarily, 'move downward' = 'fall'.
It recorded applications in PIE neatly illustrate some presently
unrecognized features of PIE. Verbs could be understood as transitive or
intransitive without further affixes.
Transitively, *re:- means 'let something fall' = 'drop'; this is the usage
which is the source for IIr 'give'.
Reflexively, *re:- means 'let one's self move downward' = 'come (down)'.
Intransitively, *re:- means 'fall'; and with a shortened vowel figures as
the first element in words for 'rain' like 2. *reg^-. The addition of -*g^
restricted the possible range of meanings for *re:- sufficiently that the
length of the vowel no longer needed to be maintained for semantic clarity.
And I am going to take the liberty of formulating Ryan's Law (though someone
else probably has said it far more eloquently): phonologically
differentiating features are often lost when they no longer felt to be
needed for semantic differentiation. Unfortunately for the Law, tolerance
for ambiguity is highly variable.
Would it impress anybody if I mentioned 'entropy'?
Of course, there are always hardheads like me who continue to say [hwen] and
[hw&t], quite uselessly, of course.
These roots built on *r are particularly fascinating because of their
transparency.
Patrick
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rick McCallister" <gabaroo6958@...>
> To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 10:35 PM
> Subject: Re: [tied] Rayim
>
>
> > Ah hah! Many books I've seen list Latin res as
> > "unknown". Some also claim a different origin for
> > Spanish res "cow, steer, beef, beast."
> >
> >
> > --- Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...> wrote:
> >
> > > On 2008-03-05 17:21, kishore patnaik wrote:
> > >
> > > > Can anyone please explain the etymology of the
> > > word Rayim( inner
> > > > prosperity)?
> > >
> > > <rayím> is the accusative of <rayís> 'property,
> > > possession, goods,
> > > wealth' (usually masculine). Skt. rayí- comes from
> > > *reh1-í- (cf. gen.sg.
> > > ra:yás < *reh1-j-ós). The synonymous <rá:s> (acc.
> > > <rá:m ~ rá:yam>) is
> > > from the same source. The original pattern of
> > > declension was probably
> > > something like *rais, acc. *ra:m, gen. *ra:yás, with
> > > analogical case
> > > forms rearranging themselves into alternative
> > > paradigms. Anyway,
> > > *reh1-i- (cf. Lat. re:s 'thing, object, property,
> > > profit', acc. re:m)
> > > seems to be a deverbal noun from *(h)reh1- 'grant,
> > > give, yield'
> > > (attested in Indo-Iranian). Other derivatives
> > > include *reh1-tí- > Skt.
> > > ra:tí- 'gift, favour'.
> > >
> > > Piotr
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________________________________
> > Be a better friend, newshound, and
> > know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
> > http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
> >
> >