No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 July 2016
I. In Skr. medín we have an Indo-Iranian -in derivative of a proethnic start-form (s)met-sdos ‘co-sedens,’ whose initial s may have been lost by haplology, but cf. Av. mat ‘μετά.’ Homeric ἂoζoς ‘attendant’ (start-form sm-sodyos) is a like compound, meaning co-sedens and not ‘mitgänger’ (pace Johannson IF. III. 199), but has suffered psilosis. Out of composition, unless the ‘suffix’ conceals a posterius, we may have a further cognate in Lat. sodalis ‘boon-companion,’ wherein sodā- may have meant something like ‘session’ (the council or board of elders in the Scotch kirk).
page 52 note 1 Herein ποδ- is quasi-prepositional: Aeoli πεδ-´ ‘cum’; cf. pad- in Skr.pad-ratha-s ‘footman in attendance on a chariot.’
page 53 note 1 Cf. τροχός ‘wheel’ =τρέχει ‘runs.’
page 54 note 1 Bender's remarks on the general analogy that may have produced t´vasvant from tav´s (p. 32 fn.) do not agree with his explanation of the accent of h´ritvant- on p. 41, fn. 2, and *harítvant- were as permissible as divítmant: It may be as well to suppose that when nominalized in the possessive derivative a secondary accent of diacritic purport was given to the adj. stem harít (i.e. *h´rit- ‘splendour’).