From: Torsten
Message: 68502
Date: 2012-02-08
> >I am sure y. cn. als. expl. ths.:
> > I have no strong views about the 'hoof' etymon. Germanic *xo:faz points
> > to *k(^)áh2p-o- or *k(^)óh2p-o-, Indo-Iranian to *k^VpH-ó- (with
> > Olsen-style aspiration by a preceding h2),
>
>
> It's not preceding; met. explains it, among others (vir L;); and Khow would have had p>pH>f if it were Indo-Iranian. Other words also have otherwise-unexpl. asp. in some forms (*pNWkWt.o+ \ -XWt.H- > -ktH-).
>
>
> > perhaps also *k^&2p-ó- (with
> > a vocalised laryngeal and no aspiration). The Slavic word is
> > strange.
> > With an unproductive suffix
>
>
> Khowar also has that suffix, which isn't unproductive, it's just
> dis. of k-k>t ( sapùk = hoof Kh; in which the falling tone on the
> (formerly) middle syl. means it was long).
>
>
> > and a velar which fails to match the IIr.
>
>
> The velar matches perfectly; it's the infl. of the met.
> "laryngeal" that causes the dif.
>
>
> > cognates it could be a loanword, but I can't see a likely source
> > language. *k^h2- hardly mends anything, since the normal reflex of
> > *k(^)h2- in Slavic seems to be *x.
>
>
> As I said, it's completely opt. if new kx > kHx , etc. (only kH>x
> in Slavic).
>
> The same kind of opt. changes occur w ks.- and kx- (compare all
>Balto-Slavic words showing alt. sk / *ks>x , etc.): skór(o)don G;
> hurdhë \ hudhër (f) Al; *ks.ordyó+ > *xsorti+ > xstor -i- = garlic
> Ar; etc.
>
>
> If you really want to start to take this seriously and learn about
> this, I guess I'll give the der.:
>
>
> * kapxYú+ = having / grasping / hand
>
> >> dim.
>
> * kap-xYu-kó+ = finger(nail) / hoof
>
>
> *
> kap-xYu-kó+
> kapH-xYu-kó+
> kxYa-pHu-kó+
> kxYa-pHu-kó+ kYxYa-pHu-kó+
> ka-pHuxY-kó+ kYa-pHuxY-kó+
> ka-pHuxY-t.ó+ kYa-pHuxY-t.ó+
>