Viktor Levickij

Im Artikel werden semantische Beziehungen zwischen drei homonymen ig. Wurzeln *ṷerĝ- (‘wirken, tun’, ‘einschließen’, ‘Kraft, Zorn’) und drei urslaw. Wurzeln *čara (‘Schale’, ‘Zauberei’, ‘Strich, Linie’) betrachtet. Alle ig. Wurzeln werden auf eine einheitliche ig. Grundform mit der Bedeutung ‘biegen, umgeben’ und drei urslaw. Wurzeln auf die Wz. *(s)kṷer- ‘schneiden’ zurückgeführt. Es ist nicht ansgeschlossen, daß ig. *(s)kṷer- eine der Varianten der ig. Wz. *sek-/seǩ-/sekṷ- mit der Bedeutung ‘schneiden’ ist. Alle drei Wurzeln können von einer Grundform *sē-/se- mit einer synkretistischen Bedeutung ‘schneiden/verbinden/biegen’ mit Hilfe der Determinative k, ǩ, kṷ gebildet sein.

The concepts of ‘cutting’ and ‘magic’ in Germanic and Slavonic languages
The article examines the semantic relationship between three homonymous IE roots *ṷerĝ- (‘to work, to do’, ‘to include’, ‘power, anger’) and three PSlav. roots *čara (‘shell’, ‘magic’, ‘stroke, line’). All the IE roots can be derived from the meaning of ‘to turn, to surround’, while the PSlav. roots go back to *(s)kṷer- ‘to cut’. It is possible that (s)kṷer- is one of the variants *sek-/seǩ-/sekṷ- with the meaning ‘to cut’. All the three roots can be built from *sē-/se-, synchronically ‘to cut / to connect / to bend’, with the help of the determinatives k, ǩ, kṷ.

The Germanic and Slavonic words for ‘milk’ and ‘to milk’
A hypothesis has been proposed stating that the Germanic words with the meaning ‘milk’ and ‘to milk’ go back to IE root *mel- ‘to crush, to squash’, ‘to spread, to smear’. This root could have generated two semantic derivatives, namely, ‘to spill; wet, moist’ and ‘to rub, to stroke’ to which the meanings ‘milk’ and ‘to milk’ go back. The Germanic *mel-uk- ‘milk’ might be a compound word, the second component o which *au eg-/ug- has the meaning ‘to increase, to add’.
 

Latin servus ‘servant, slave’, Slav. *orbъ ‘slave, orphan, child’, Slav. *sirota ‘orphan’
The oldest names for ‘slave’ in Indo-European languages are connected with the notions ‘captive’, ‘prisoner’, ‘tied’. Taking into consideration this typology we can assume that Lat. servus ‘servant, slave’ might go back to PIE *ser- ‘to tie, to bind’. PIE *or-bho-s, to which Proto-Slav. *orbъ ‘slave, child, orphan’ goes back, may have been formed from *er-/or- ‘to cut, to separate’ > ‘orphan’. The Proto-Slav. word *sirota ‘orphan’ may also have been formed after this pattern.