Re: Stacking up on standard works

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "dgkilday57" <dgkilday57@...> wrote:

>
>
>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "stlatos" <sean@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "dgkilday57" <dgkilday57@> wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "stlatos" <sean@> wrote:
> >
> > > > There's no reason to expect a regular change for either above; quadru- shows tr > dr , dr > tr in taeter , maybe vitrum , and definitely:
> > >
> > > In _quadri/u-_ we may have contamination with an old word for 'whetstone', *quadrum, replaced by _co:s_; cf. OE _hwaet_ 'keen, bold', OS _hwat_ 'id.', OHG _(h)waz_ 'sharp, rough, severe', ON _hvatr_ 'bold, vigorous'; OE _hwettan_, OHG _wezzan_, ON _hvetja_ 'to whet', from PGmc *xwatjanan. Whetstones are generally square and *quadrum could have passed into the meaning 'square', whence _quadra:re_ 'to make square', and squares have 4 corners.
> > >
> > That is certainly a possibility that I would never have thought of. There's a reason for that.
> >
> Note that Pokorny's root-shape *kWe(:)d-/*kWo(:)d- (IEW 636) is impossible. Whether you like it or not, PIE *kWo(:)- loses its labialization in Germanic (Moeller, PBB 7:483, 1882). We are dealing with what Piotr calls a quasi-Narten root with PIE *-a:- in the strong grade, *-a- in the weak (pace scholae Lugdunensis Septentrionalis). The best example is *swa:d-/*swad- 'sweet', whose derivatives violate Lubotsky's Law in the RV.
>

If the gradation was *swa:d-/*swad-, where does * su:d- come from in:

va:d = salt Baluch;
sú:dy:ti (v) = salt/pickle Lith;

* südínas > sirín = sweet Khow;

* su:dis > su:tis = peaceful / gentle Go;
* s(w)a:dmis > sáim = pleasant EIr; sáimhe = peace Ir;

sva:ttá- = spiced S; xVa:sta- = cooked Av;
su:da-s = cook S;


Also, in:

*swa:tw- > *swa:ty- > *kHacHr > kHaLcHr = sweet Ar;
sanizi- Hit;

there's -t- not -d- (to ts before i or y in both (in Hit d would have been d > dz > z (written the same as s)).

>

The root in question is *kWa:d-/*kWad- 'sharp'. All of Pok.'s good citations come from one or the other in Gmc. The Skt. verb and Lat. _triquetrus_ are false friends.

>

So, this root is only found in Gmc? Or are there any other cogn.?

> The Sabine language itself, like Oscan, underwent voicing of word-int. tenuis + res. as we see in _Publius_, _publicus_ against pure Latin _Poplius_, _poplicus_. Sabine, like South Picene, also fortited /l/ in certain positions toward [d], so the Sab.-Lat. lateralization of /d/ in _lachrima_, _lympha_, and _le:vir_ also comes from hypercorrection.
> > >

Isn't lympha < *nympha: << Greek?