*G^EN-

[proto-language]

Dear Peter and IEists:

---- Original Message -----
From: "petegray" <petegray at btinternet.com>
Sent: Friday, June 08, 2001 1:35 PM

[PCRp]

>> *g^enH1- would constitute an exception to the general proposition that IE
>> roots have the form CVC-.  Every good "rule" needs an exception or two.

[PG]

> here are many exceptions of this kind, Pat.  Are you being, perhaps, a
> little disingenuous?   Just for the pattern Ce(/R)TH (T= stop), one can
> suggest:
>   *keubH2   lie down, lay down
>   *sekH        cut
>   *wedhH1   hit
>   *wetH2      say
>   *krepH      creep
> The pattern of g'enH,  CeRH, is even commoner.

[PCR]

It is well-established in Afrasian studies, that roots are CVC. If we assume
that IE and Afrasian are derived from a common ancestor, Nostratic, it is
natural to suppose that all non-borrowed IE roots are originally derived from
Nostratic CVC roots even though the CVC component may not have survived in IE
as an independent root in a given instance.

To take one of the examples you have provided, *keubH2-, 'lie down, lay down',
I see no reason not to derive it from Pokorny's 2. *kew-, 'bend'.

Why do you not explain to us why you believe that it cannot be so derived, and
must constitute an independent, unrelated root?

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)