From: fournet.arnaud
Message: 55894
Date: 2008-03-25
----- Original Message -----
From: Piotr Gasiorowski
On 2008-03-24 23:07, fournet.arnaud wrote:
> You know
> "sheep" used to be *H3owi
> "bone" used to be *H3ost-
>
> Why is it impossible to assume
> that ossomai is H1okw-j-e/o
> denominative from Hokw "eye" ?
OK, but the reconstructions of *h2owi- and *h2ost- have not been emended
without reason (*h2ast- = //h2est-//, the weak allomorph of *h2ost-, is
even directly attested in Celtic, and there's some good if less direct
evidence for *h2awi-). Now, what evidence makes you posit *h1 in 'eye/look'?
Piotr
========
I'm interested to know about *H2ost in Celtic.
Now, the diverse reasons why
I'm not satisfied with *H3_kw for "eye"
1. opi:peuô is better with H1_kw
it does not need to be irregular in that case
It's the one reason within PIE borders I know.
Another possible reason is *sekw "to see"
if you admit sekw is s-H1_kw
There is no reason s mobile is impossible
before a laryngeal.
this verb is not locked with -o- vowel.
I think this is a very strong reason.
It cannot be **s-H3_kw-
2. I like the idea that
Arabic Haddaja, Haddaqa "to look at carefully"
is the same as H1_kw with the -dh-
that is exhibited in Greek op-th-almos.
Even though Hadda seems to conflict
with this idea. It's hard to know which is original.
Hadda is apocoped or root,
this is a moot point.
3. ST forms mHok "eye" can be an instrumental
derivative m-H1ok
or they also may be from m?ok (H3ok)
4. in view of some languages having
mok "face" (Burushashki, Basque, etc)
we can keep m?ok = H3_k(w)
for the signified "face"
In other words,
I'm suggesting to cut this "root"
in two roots.
Face m?okw = H3okw
Eye H1okw
Arnaud
============