{{l|grc|ἡλίκος||which size}}, {{l|sla-pro|*velikъ}} and suchlike
Your UI script slows down my phone and editing the previous post hung up on update. Wasn't there a way to switch to classic view? At least it shouldn't prevent me from using the preview, that was my fault. The links are: ἡλίκος (hēlíkos, “which size”), *velikъ --what went wrong with the title?
Turns out it does break preview for me, loading "No such thread".
The etymology at ἡλίκος (hēlíkos) shows something very different from what you proposed.
I have said that it is confusing. This wording is misleading: “the same suffix as talis …”. Maybe I never followed the link, as it reminded me of cases like ‘’-(t)icus’’, see ‘’-cus’’ below.
Now that I read the entry I see what you mean: helix and talis, and maybe ‘’helikos’’ as well if this is to be inferred, do tentatively agree that *h2el- could be the second element, while *swe-, *to-, and *yos- would give each the respective initial element. It’s a bit messy, and there’s more.
- Insofar I had implied that the remaining elements would match in *velikъ and helikos, you might object that I haven't read closely: The PSlav entry links *-ikъ without further PIE root, and notes that it were “Probably not related to Sanskrit -ईक (-īká) and Latin -īco”, whereas the AGr entry links *kos-, the same Latin ‘’-ico’’ links to, ultimately, listing e.g.: PSlav *-kъ and *-ъkъ, PGem *-gaz, Latin ‘’-cus’’, AGr -κός, PII *-kas, and *-kasa, *-ćasa … Meanwhile, the /i/ in ‘’helikos’’ et al goes unexplained, and I could not tell the /ks/ in ‘’helix’’, either.
- ‘’-icus’’ effectively explains PIE “*-ikos” thus: “From i-stem + -cus, occurring in some original case and later used freely” (is there a shorter word for this meme, ‘’o.i.s.o.c.a.l.u.f.’’?). It does not list ‘’-ico’’ as relative, whereas ‘’-ico’’ is: “From -ō suffixed to words with stems ending in -ic (e.g. -icus)” (surely a case of o.i.s.o.c.a.l.u.f.). Lat. ‘’-o-’’ counts eight derivations, it’s a single vowel, I have to ignore this. A bit vexing, AGr. '’hos’’ implicates a diphtong ‘’*ey’’similar to *-ikъ, but in the wrong place, as ’’hos’’ is etymologized “From Proto-Indo-European *yós, *yéh₂, *yód (“who, which”), from the relative stem *yo-, from the anaphoric stem *i-, *ey-.” whereas “the *-i in *-ikъ thus reflects a diphthong *ey”, which is maybe implied by *velьjь, “From vele + jь with tense e becoming ь”? Indeed: *yos links *jь. What’s an i-stem?
This’s what the pages say. It “probably” does not contradict the comparison. I’m first of all focused on the semantics, though, which match so well that no explanation was needed. For a start it might be best to tie up the loose ends.
Dercksen assigns *welh1- to *velikъ indeed, further indexing a doublette *velъkъ with West Slavic variants.
Does that make sense sofar? Wellicht? 109.41.0.191