*G^EN-

[proto-language]

Dear Peter and IEists:

----- Original Message -----
From: "petegray" <petegray at btinternet.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 2:49 PM

> Pat said:

>> *keubH2-, 'lie down, lay down',
>> I see no reason not to derive it from Pokorny's 2. *kew-, 'bend'

[PG]

> Help yourself.  It doesn't alter my (or any normal) understanding of PIE.

[PCR]

I am not sure if I am being tagged with an *abnormal* understanding of PIE by
maintaining the primacy of CVC-roots. Is that your intention?

But your remark also puzzles me. I thought you were objecting to my willingness
to derive every non-borrowed PIE stem ultimately from a CVC-root. And as part
of an objection, you cited *keubH2- as an example of a stem that was not
derived from a simpler CVC-root, hence was itself a root (CVCCH), obviously not
CVC!

If you have no problem with deriving *keubH2- from *kew-, then what was your
point in mentioning it (*keubH2-) at all?

Under these circumstances, why should I care?

Isolating the initial CVC-component of PIE stems allows comparison with initial
CVC-segments of PAA triliteral roots.

Just for the record, I would analyze *keubH2- as follows:

1) Root theme: *ke/o- (better *khe/o-), 'to close (around)';
+
2) *-w, repeated activity implying a goal
=
*k(h)ew-, 'close up all around'
+
3) *-b, 'spot, location'
=
*k(h)eub-, nominal: 'closed up place'; verbal: 'make a closed up place (as by
curling up in sleep)'
+
4) *-H (H1 = <?>), stative
=
*k(h)eubH-, 'curled up while lying'.

Pat

PATRICK C. RYAN | PROTO-LANGUAGE at email.msn.com (501) 227-9947 * 9115 W. 34th
St. Little Rock, AR 72204-4441 USA WEBPAGES: PROTO-LANGUAGE:
http://www.geocities.com/proto-language/ and PROTO-RELIGION:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/2803/proto-religion/indexR.html "Veit ec
at ec hecc, vindgá meiði a netr allar nío, geiri vndaþr . . . a þeim
meiþi, er mangi veit, hvers hann af rótom renn." (Hávamál 138)