From: andythewiros
Message: 65258
Date: 2009-10-15
>This is going out on a limb, but would anyone agree that there might be a possibility that *handuz could be a participial form, like *tanþ-, with -u- from either the instrumental or the accusative, and that the base verb could be the verb that is the origin of Skt <aç-> 'attain', <aks.-> 'attain'? <aç-> has an infixed nasal in many of its forms and I believe for that reason it is usually related to Latin <nanciscor> 'get, obtain', so perhaps this verb is not a good candidate. Any other ideas?
>
> I'm reluctant to agree that composite forms of *ken- or *k^em- plus *dH- explain 'hand'. To me this is like saying that 'foot' comes from *po- plus *d- ('that which gives (the ability) to go away or depart'? -- *(a)po 'from, away' plus *deH3- 'give'). I know that *komtus would probably be composite as well, but maybe we have to give up that hypothesis as the origin of 'hand'. Maybe 'hand' is just a lone wolf with its own form.
>