W dniu 2012-03-10 11:12, Tavi pisze:
> Turkic has a velar suffix not found in the other groups. From what I've
> seen of the EDAL, this kind of suffixes are rather frequent in Altaic,
> and sometimes are included in PAltaic protoforms (between parentheses).
>
> My point is Hittite *hartagga-* has a similar suffix not found in the
> other IE forms. Of course, this doesn't necessarily imply a direct
> relationship between Hittite and Turkic, but it's rather an ANALOGY.
What do you mean by "analogy" in such a case? In linguistics we speak of
analogy if a word is reshaped so as to conform to an already existing
precedent -- usually a rule-governed pattern. What do you think the
Hittites did?
As for *-k^o- in Indo-European, suffice it to mention *h2juh3n.-k^ó-
'young', derived from the impeccably IE compound *h2ju-h3on-. Rare as it
may have been, the suffix certainly existed and formed adjectives. It
can be inferred from the accent shifted to the zero-grade root syllable
that *h2r.'tk^o- was a deadjectival noun. Even if we cannot identify the
root securely, there is also a possibly related abstract noun,
*h2rétk^es- 'damage, destruction', preserved in Indo-Iranian.
Piotr