On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 23:28:39 +0100, "fournet.arnaud"
<
fournet.arnaud@...> wrote:
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Piotr Gasiorowski
>
>
>So far, _you_ have presented no clear argument for separating *h3ekW-
>from *h1ekW- and you are trying to shift the burden off your shoulders.
>
>Piotr
>
>=========
>Dear Piotr
>
>In north Caucasic,
>
>to see/ eye *?_kw
>face : *H_(r)q.w
I think what Piotr had in mind was internal evidence from
Indo-European.
The material in Pokorny offers only two possibilities:
1) Greek ení:sso: (geneuert ení:pto:), Aor. e:ní:papon und
enéni:pon `tadeln, rügen, ahnden, tätlich zurechtweisen',
without breaking, so possibly from *h1en-h1i-h1kW-je/o-.
2) OIr. enech, mcymr. enep `Gesicht, Antlitz', mbret. enep
ds. und Präp. `gegen', und cymr. wyneb `Antlitz', acymr.
let-einepp `halbe Seite' [unklar]. With apparent -e-, so
possibly from *h1en-h1ekW-om.
Both cases are possible, but not very strong (e.g. we could
have distant assimilation *h1..h3 > *h1..h1).
Also interesting (from the point of view of labialization
dissimilation) is Pokorny's reference to the root *ok-
"überlegen" (Greek oknos, Gmc. aha, ahta).
=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
miguelc@...