*G^EN-

[proto-language]

Dear Peter and IEists:

----- Original Message -----
From: "petegray" <petegray at btinternet.com>
Sent: Saturday, July 07, 2001 9:46 AM

[pPCR]

>>> *keubH2-, 'lie down, lay down',
>>> I see no reason not to derive it from Pokorny's 2. *kew-, 'bend'. Isolating
>>> the initial CVC-component of PIE stems allows comparison with initial
>>> CVC-segments of PAA triliteral roots.

[PG]

> Yes, I understand why you wish to derive PIE *keubH from **kew.

> It is always tedious to rehearse arguments.   My examples were of roots with
> final -CH, of which there are plenty.   For theoretical reasons, you wish to
> reduce all of these to CVC roots.  You may or may not be right, but the fact
> that your reason for doing it is theoretical, and not based on PIE evidence,
> is why I suggest (too dismissively, and I'm sorry for that), that the theory
> is actually irrelevant to PIE data.  I also suspect that PIE data will not
> affect your belief, so I didn't pursue the argument further.

[PCR]

It is the evidence which has bolstered my support for this method of analysis.

If form and semantics have no bearing on possible connections, then comparative
work is frivolous.

I have indicated but will reiterate that I do not consider *keubH- a CVC root +
H. I consider it a CVC (*kew-) root plus *b AND *H.

[PG]

> Incidentally you have still not responded to my interpretation of PIE, where
> I suggest that it is the -u- in *keubH which is the essential vowel, not
> the -e-.  If you want connections with PAA, then the triliteral root *K-U-B
> is surely a better guess than the biconsonantal *K-e-W.

[PCR]

Not in my opinion. As I have already explained, it is CVC roots that are most
readily comparable between PIE and PAA.

If I am correct in suggesting that the root *kew- should be properly **khew-,
the expected Arabic reflex would be gh-w. We find in Arabic gh-w-g, 'bend the
body, incline towards the ground'; gh-w-S, 'dive'; gh-w-T, 'be bent (wood)
[?inghâTa]; gh-w-y, 'cause to be bent towards'; and other which I will not
include because the connection is less obvious but probably still valid.

[ Moderator's note:
  This is irrelevant to the Indo-European list unless and until a genetic
  relationship between Indo-European and Afro-Asiatic can be demonstrated.
  --rma ]

I assume your *K-U-B was a simple typing error because there are no roots of
this form (*K-W-B is, of course, possible).

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)