Re: Gemination in Celtic

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "fournet.arnaud"
<fournet.arnaud@...> wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Anders R. Joergensen" <ollga_loudec@...>
> > =================
> >
> >
> > You have not stated what you think of
> > O. irl menicc = many ?
>
> This is indeed a word with an old geminate. However, the closest
> cognate outside Celtic seems to be Germ. *manaG-, which cannot have
> PIE *-g- (< *-?k-), as one would suppose in a non-Italo-Celtic
> language. Or did I misunderstand you?
> Anders
> ========
>
> Osl has menogu "viel" which works
> Germanic looks like a LW in that case.
> Arnaud
>

I guess you mean mUnogU? It may have both older *-g- and *-gH- (of
which the latter is slightly less complicated, as there is no
Winter's lengthening).

I guess you _could_ take the Germ. word to have been borrowed from
Slavic, though I don't think it's at all likely (it would have to be
later than the sound shift in Germ. and the forms don't really match).

So not really convincing. OIr. menicc, W mynych must reflect PCelt.
*menekki-. The -kk- is usually explained as "expressive" (or whatever
word one would use) which seems OK in a word of such meaning.

> ==========
> > creicc "buy" < kwriH2-k-
> > Greek pri-a-o (a = H2)
>
> Another derivative of this root is OIr. críth < PCelt. *kWri:tu-.
> A.
> =======
> Does it mean you consider this example acceptable ?
> Arnaud
> ==========

No. What would happen with *-?t- in Celtic? OIr. -th- is from single
PCelt. *-t-, not geminate.

>
> >
> > Now
> > briccus "speckled" is better compared with *bhreH2-k-
> > than with Lituanian marga.
>
> Is this Pokorny's (p. 139) *bher&g^-, *bhre:g^- 'glänzen, weiS'? Or
> are you thinking of another root? What Eastern words are you hinting
> at?
> Anders
> =============
> Yes this root makes sense
> and there is plenty of traces of H in the data.
>
> Arnaud
>
> ===============

But this root is usually reconstructed with -h1-. I though your law
only worked with one of your two h2's.

Anders