[YG Conlang Archives] > [westasianconlangs group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
habarakhe4 wrote: > --- In westasianconlangs@yahoogroups.com, "Isaac Penzev" > <isaacp@...> wrote: > > > > habarakhe4 wrote: > > > > > > > I haven't gotten very far, but here are some features of the > more > > > common radicals: > > > III-W > > > III-Y > > > II-M/N > > > I-S > > > > I'd love to know what it means... > > > > -- Yitzik > > > Would Pe, Ayin, and Lamedh be clearer than I, II, III? > > Lamedh-Waw roots come from the o- and u-declensions of Greek: ik_wo- > > *yaqaw > > Lamedh-Yodh roots come from the Greek bilateral roots + the y that > disappeared in Greek and gave contract conjugations: KAL+ Y > kaleyo > > kaleo & > *kalay > > Ayin-Mem/Nun roots come from the n-insertion in certain IE roots: > LAB > lambano/elabe & > *lamab > > Pe-Samekh roots come from the s- prefix often attached to the > initial consonants of IE stems: pek > Lat. specio, Gk. skepyo & > > *sakap Awfully intriguing. I'm sorry I failed to understand the original message. I was thinking in the terms of *Semitic* morphology adapted to smth Greek, not vice versa as it turns out from your explanation. What about some other types, like, e.g. Lamedh-Ayin (or whatever laryngeal that may be responsible for elonagtions): leipo/elipe > L.3.P, huh? -- the busy Yitz