Re: The phonetic value of PIE *h3 and the 'drink' root.
--- In cybalist@y..., "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@h...> wrote:
> If some PIE verbal or nominal root contains the ablaut vowel
> [e/o/nothing], and that
> PIE -peH-/-poH-/-pH- -> -pe:-/-po:-/-b'-
> (applicable also to other stops of course)
> does that mean that (verbal or nominal) root would end up as a
> pradigm with a "mixed" root (-p-t-/-p-d-) which might be levelled
> either way?
I believe that in this hypothetical context the fuller form would be
**peh3t. The most voiced trajectory for the zero grade would have
been ph3t > bh3t > bt > pt. However, the reduced grade of *pod-
'foot' (no laryngeal!) was pd > bd, with bd- > ped- initially.
Piotr has posted, in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/2630, examples of
Sanskrit compounds with a non-initial element 'bd' for foot.
I don't know of any levelling arising from such construction, but I
wouldn't be surprised to see the arguments (e.g.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/4674) over Greek
ogdoos 'eighth' (compared with okto: 'eight') resurface.
Can we still write xW for h3 and claim that 'x' is a substitute for
gamma as well as chi?
** indicates a reconstruction I don't believe.
- --- In email@example.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
> Krause-Thomas, 201
> "Das Wort für 'machen' . . . zeigt in A einen merkwürdigen Wechsel
> Formen ya- und ypa-, wobei ypa- in den Formen mit idg. Themavokal oIt does not seem to have been given any sensible explanation. But
> steht. In A sonst normal nach Kl. III: Akt. ypam, yat, yas.; ypamäs,
> *yac, ypeñc. Med. ypama:r, yata:r, yatär; ypamtär, *yacär, ypantär.
> PPs. ypant; ypama:n; Ger. I yal; Inf. yatsi."
> Metathesis py- > yp- ?
since /p/ is restricted to places with thematic vowel *-o-, it looks
very much like a matter of palatalization, i.e. some phoneme has been
lost before *-e-, but retained as /p/ before *-o-. No known (morpho)
phoneme does this regularly in Tocharian, so it looks like a
spontaneous change, and it *is* a lone example. The obvious candidate
is *-w- which sometimes alternates with <p>, and is palatalized to y
in B (though not in A, cf. B yente, A want 'wind'). It will seem that
the combination *y-w'- (with palatalized w before *-e-) was
assimilated to *y-y-. The root vowel Toch.A -a- is Proto-Toch. /æ/
from earlier *-o- or *-e:-, of which the latter is the obvious
solution, for /e:/ can arise through contraction of e+e across a lost
*-y- (B trey, A tre 'three' from *træs < *tre:s < IE *tréy-es). So we
have *yew-e- > *yew'-e- > *yey-e- > *yee- > *ye:- > *yæ- > TA ya-.
And, with thematic vowel *-o-, *yew-o- > *yäwæ- > *ywæ- > ypa- (with
something like [b]?).
So, it will seem that *yew-o-/*yew-e- can yield Toch.A ypa-/ya-
without much fuss. As for the identity of the root, the best
comparandum is probably Skt. yu- 'connect, hold tight, harness' with
prs. yáuti and yuváti. The structure *yéw-e/o- could be the original
subjunctive. Perhaps the semantic development from 'connect' to 'make'
goes via something like 'knit'.