Reconstruction talk:Proto-Balto-Slavic/śímta

From Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to navigation Jump to search

And why not śimtan? --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 05:24, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As usual, a Slavic word that doesn't fit well into so-called "Balto-Slavic" reconstructions is marked "irregular". That's the truly scientific way of reasoning, I guess. 178.46.71.50 13:07, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's almost fully proven *sъ̀to to be an Iranian borowing and not a descendant of *śímta(n).
Such an evolution of *ę dirrectly into *ъ is impossible. In Bulgarian there are some simillar examples like жътва (žǎtva) < Old Church Slavonic жѧтва (žętva) but here existed a doublet form жѫтва (žǫtva) because the two Yus'es began to merge (as in Polish, for example) and then the Big Yus in жѫтва (žǫtva) became a clear vowel, i.e. ѫ > ъ.
The only possible descendant of the PBSl form is *sęto. It's sure that it existed once. And yes, it has to be moved to *śímta(n) or dirrectly to *śímtan. (This has to be done of course to *dwára and similar lexems. Ентусиастъ (talk) 18:53, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Reconstruction_talk:Proto-Balto-Slavic/śímta&oldid=63161692"