Reconstruction talk:Proto-Balto-Slavic/damús

@Ентусиастъ: What do you mean, clarification (Eastern) here is unnecessary? Here it is quite possible to clarify that these languages are located in the east. I have read, but this collective agreement does not prohibit my actions. Gnosandes (talk) 21:22, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

νόμος

@Gnosandes. Hi, could the Latvian and Lithuanuan words actually be related to Ancient Greek νόμος (nómos) and thus to not be descendants of *damús?

This is a possibility, according to LKEZ:

Lie. nãmas, la. nams vieni tyrinėtojai sieja su s. sl. domъ, r. дом, skr.dámaḥ, gr. δóμος, lo. domus, arm. tun, baltų kalbų konsonantizmo skirtumą aiškindami disimiliacija. Kiti – lie. nãmas, la. nams linkę sieti su gr. νομóς ‘ganykla, gyvenamoji vieta, buveinė’, gr. νέμω ‘apgyvenu, apdirbu, valdau’, gr. νομεύς ‘piemuo’. Sabaliausko nuomone, labiau įmanomas lie. nãmas siejimas su ide. namo pavadinimu, nes žodžio pradžios d- ir n- kaitaliojimasis gana įprastas reiškinys.

Via Google Translate:

Lithuanian nãmas, Latvian nams some researchers associate it with s. sl. domъ, r. дом, skr.dámaḥ, gr. δóμος, lo. domus, arm. tun, interpreting the difference in consonantism of the Baltic languages by dissimilation. Others - lith. nãmas, latv. houses tend to be associated with gr. νομóς ‘pasture, residence, habitat’, gr. νέμω ‘I live, work, possess’, gr. νομεύς ‘piemuo’. According to Sabaliauskas, it is more possible to lie. linking to ide. in the name of the house, because the alternation of the d- and n- at the beginning of the word is a fairly common phenomenon.

https://etimologija.baltnexus.lt/?w=namas

Ентусиастъ (talk) 10:21, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

@Ентусиастъ: The Indo-European comparison is, in my opinion, dubious. There should be two reconstructions, yes. Illich-Svitych wrote in his 1963 work that the Baltic form has an accent paradigm 2. Because of this, it is simply impossible to compare it with the Proto-Slavic form. Try changing this. Gnosandes (talk) 15:19, 14 July 2021 (UTC)