IE *k^won and its origin

[Adam Hyllested]

ROBERT ORR:

> "Ironically, although there does seem to be a considerable amount of
> evidence that the notions 'dog' and 'wolf' can be combined, the
> reconstruction of Nostratic *küynä

(or, at least, velar plosive + vowel + n + vowel - the Nostratic etc.
reconstructions are even less authorized than the IE ones)

> ,based on a comparison of PIE *kuon with
> various other forms in Uralic, Afro- Asiatic, etc., may not be a good
> example of the phenomenon.  It has been proposed on and off for nearly a
> century, starting with Osthoff (1901:199, et passim), that PIE *kuon is in
> fact originally derived from the root which gives Latin pecus, Gothic faihu,
> etc., < IE *peku-, and that OCS pisu is also related.

Hmm, peculiar. But no doubt that OCS pisu is PIE *pek^u- in some form.

> According to such a
> reconstruction *kuon would originally have meant "sheep-dog", and be derived
> from something similar to *pekuon < *peku- + - on, with PIE *kuon derived
> from *pkuon, a zero-grade form of *pekuon.  Such an etymology allows us to
> derive, ultimately, both the set of forms normally traced back to IE *kuon,
> and OCS pisu, from the same root.

That's comfortable, of course, if you want to reconstruct only on the
basis of IE proper.
But what about the vast Nostratic etc. material?

> Osthoff's theory has found a small but
> steady stream of followers, e.g., Knobloch (1971), Hamp (1980), who have
> added further refinements."

> And by way of clarifictaion, recall that Slavic tended to insert jer vowels
> into old IE zero-grades, thus giving us *piku-.  Hamp has a convincng line
> of argumentation showing how other Slavic derivational forms  (e.g.,
> pisynja) could be seen as from pikuon, and how pisu (< *piku-) would be a
> back formation.

> This etymology allows to explain OCS pisu, which is troublesome in most
> reconstructions.  It is very likely an old *-u-stem.

More troublesome, though, for the attempt to link the other 'dog'-words to
*pek^u- is the fact that NONE of these contain an initial <p>. Note even
Lithuanian <s^u~o>.

> For IE *kuon < *pekuon, see

> Hamp, Eric P. 1980. "IE *()kuon - dog". Indogermanische Forschungen 85.35-42.

> Knobloch, Johann. 1971. "Die indogermanische Benennung des Hundes", Donum
> Indogermanicum. ed. by Robert Schmitt-Brandt, 39-40. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.

> Osthoff, Hermann. 1901. Etymologische Parerga, Erster Teil, Leipzig: S.
> Hirzel.

All published before the renaissance of cross-linguistic comparison.

> And perhaps one could segment Modern Turkish kopek - dog (I don't have
> dacritics in this programme) as ko + pek, thus providing us with a beautiful
> parallel from outsde IE?)

Parallel or common origin? I don't get it either way.
If you mean common origin, what is 'ko' then? *pko?
ko-pek = sheepdog-sheep?

Best regards,
Adam Hyllested