--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "david_russell_watson" <liberty@...>
wrote:
> Oh I forgot to mention that there is in the Vedas mentioned
> a character 'Traitana' as well, who must also be taken into
> consideration alongside Trita Aptya and Thraetaona Athwiya.
> Can your system of sound changes produce his name out of the
> same basis you posit for 'Thraetaona', or will you at long
> last allow that not every similar word has to be forced into
> the same bag?
>
> David
Tritá- A:ptyá- is, as far as I know, split up into two people in the
Avesta: Thrita- and A:thwiya- who were likely originally the same (as
well as their sons K@...@sa:spa- and Thraetaona- (A:thwiya:ni-)).
K@...@sa:spa- probably is from *Kr,s.ra-aswa- 'having a horned beast as
a mount' gained from slaying Az^i- Sruvara- while on its back.
Since A:ptyá- and A:thwiya- are obviously related, how can you use
your preferred method to relate them? There's no other case of p
becoming w and moving so any rule would apply to this word only, just
like with Targitaos.
Traitaná- is probably related to Thraetaona-, though the common
mythological features aren't apparent from the little given in the
Vedas, but the change of au>a (at least) is a problem no matter which
origin is true, so mine has no dis- or advantage.
You seem to have said that since Thraetaona- is connected to one
known myth, it can't be related to Targitaos, too. I'd say the little
known of the myth from one source isn't enough to say anything either
way, but there's no reason why it couldn't be directly related to
Thraetaona- and his three sons, etc. Zeus and a daughter of a river
are a third son and a watery being, as close to Tritá- A:ptyá- as
we're likely to see in a translated partial story. This could be the
older type, if his parents Tritá-s and Aptyá:- were combined in one
person, which explains the name better (watery, with met. to create a
masculine stem).
If you're questioning how two apparently Iranian languages could
have different reflexes of *triitewxnos based on metathesis, since at
least ri > ir and i-a > a-i happened once, the movement of Na in one
group and not another is no stranger.