*G^EN-

[Rich Alderson]

On 17 Jun 2001, Pat Ryan wrote:

> 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.

So the question you are really asking is, "Is **g'en- a possible Nostratic
root?", then?  Wrong newsgroup for that discussion...

> 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?

No, that's not how it works.  As the one proposing the etymology, it is up to
you to demonstrate why it should be accepted.  And if you are proposing it as
an *Indo-European* etymology, you are restricted to using only IE materials in
your demonstration.  (Internal reconstructions are of course fair game.)

								Rich Alderson