From: dgkilday57
Message: 65356
Date: 2009-11-03
>PIE mediae aspiratae, mediae, and tenues were not in free variation. In order to explain these alleged doublets as AA loanwords, you need either two distinct branches of AA with divergent treatment of Old PAA stops, or repeated borrowings by PIE from different stages of PAA, implying lengthy contact. I do not rule out either possibility a priori, but you need a larger stock of consistently related PIE doublets, and some plausible geographic area for the borrowing to take place, in order to have a coherent theory.
> -- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "dgkilday57" <dgkilday57@> wrote:
> >
> > Regarding the putative connection between Old English <hentan>,
> <huntian> and Gothic <fra-hinþan> etc., the OED (s.v. <hunt>) refers
> the reader to A.S. Napier, "Old English Notes" (MQLL 1:130-131, 1898):
> >
> Hi, Douglas!
>
> With regard to Gothic /hinþan/, Bomhard (2008) reconstruct a
> pseudo-PIE **kem-t- 'to size, to grasp' (#358), cognate to AA *kam- 'to
> hold, grasp'. But unlike him, I consider this as a borrowing which also
> gave PIE *ghe(n)dh- 'to take'.
>
> Pairs of the type *ghe(n)dh- ~ **kemt- or *ghabh- ~ *kab- are to be
> considered as AA loanwords in PIE.