--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Joao S. Lopes" <josimo70@...> wrote:
>
> Did *tempos replace an older *temHos ? What's the explanation for the -p- in templus and amplus?
I see no replacement here. If Greek <temakhos> 'slice of salted fish' belongs with this root, the extension could be either *tem-h2- or *tem-n- (cf. <stomakhos>, <stoma> from *stom-n-). Sanskrit <tamisra:-> shows that the second vowel of Latin <tenebrae> represents a laryngeal, thus probably *temh2-sreh2-, originally 'division between day and night, twilight', hence 'gloom, darkness, blindness, rashness' etc.
Latin <templum> originally signified 'bounded space', ritually cut out of its surroundings for augurial observations (as in the passage from Varro which I cited in my recent post on <arbiter>). It thus appears to be a simple passive noun *temp-lom 'that which is, or should be, cut out' vel sim.
I have no convincing etymology of <amplus>. If it is borrowed from P-Italic, perhaps it meant 'unfilled, unfillable', hence 'immense', by semantic devaluation simply 'large, wide'. The negative prefix is illustrated by Oscan <amprufid> 'improperly' = Lat. <improbe:>, <ancensto> f. sg. 'uncounted in the census' = Lat. <incensa>, Umbrian <anhostatu> acc. m. pl. 'unequipped with spears' i.e. 'civilians' = Lat. <inhasta:to:s>, <ans'ihitu> 'ungirded (with official regalia)' = Lat. <incincto:s>. Buck (OUG sec. 98) regards it as a generalization of the prevocalic negative *n.n- (Greek an-, Sanskrit an-).
Probably <ampla> 'handle of a shield or vessel' is unrelated. If this is from P-Italic, it could represent earlier *am(p)tla: from Italic *m.-tla: 'implement for grasping, handle'; the corresponding verb is Lat. <emere>, which occurs in Umbrian as <emantur> 3pl. pres. subj. pass. '(whether) they should be accepted'.
DGK