From: dgkilday57
Message: 67808
Date: 2011-06-18
>Latin <acupedius> (pre-classical, only Paul. Fest.) has the expected zero-grade prefix *&3ku- (cf. <o:cior> 'swifter'). The problem I have with the 'swift-wing' explanation of <accipiter> is that it cannot explain the geminate. Crossing with <acceptor> is implausible. Most of the Romance languages have simply replaced <accipiter> with <acceptor>. Haplology of *accipitipitros (with obsolete *acceps replaced by <praeceps> in Cl. Lat.) avoids these problems.
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "dgkilday57" <dgkilday57@> wrote:
>
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "stlatos" <stlatos@> wrote:
> > >
> > > [...]
> > > The start of the word shows the same variation seen in accipiter and acupedius, so an origin in 'water' or borrowing seems to gain no weight from it. All the same, even if you acknowledge the 3 are related, it doesn't completely rule out the possibility of borrowing if there was analogy among the three afterwards (as swift an. in the 3 divisions of the world).
> >
> > I regard <accipiter> as resulting from haplology of *accipitipitros 'falling headlong', which is what these birds do at great speed when attacking prey. Nothing to do with 'swift' or 'take' originally.
> >
> Then Hom. o:kupterós , K oxúpteros , next to oxúpous , L acupedius 'swift-footed' , would be a very great coincidence.
>