Re: Latin -idus as from dH- too

Piotr,

You know as well as I do that the original meaning or use of a formant is no
proof against it being used in a wrong if semantically similar construction.

The element -dh- in these is 'handle, tool'. It leads to an occupational
usage.

The element -t- in these refers to future action, which leads to
habituality.

Latin <aratrum> is not "ploughing" but rather the 'plow'. Here, the 'plow'
is personalized as 'the one who turns up earth'.

Latin <cribrum> is nor 'sifting' but 'sieve'. Here -*dh- works as the 'tool
with which one sifts'.


Patrick

----- Original Message -----
From: "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2008 6:19 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] Latin -idus as from dH- too


> On 2008-03-15 23:59, Patrick Ryan wrote:
>
> > Olsen wrong again.
> > There is no alternation between *r and *l in PIE.
> > -dhr/lo- is occupational
> > -tr/lo is habitual
> > Easily confused; and what is easy you can be sure will be done.
>
> So ploughing (*h2ar&3-trom > aratrum) is habitual while sifting
> (*k^rei(h1)-tHrom > cri:brum) is occupational?
>
> Piotr
>
>