Прислали тезисы, попросили прокомментировать. Я не шибко большой специалист в ПИЕ, но что-то интуитивно меня смущает. У кого-то есть соображения по поводу написанного?
" §1. Numeral as an abstract entity comes from the primal principle of division, sharing, partaking, expressed
with PIE *d:
*deh₂(j)- ”to share, divide” (as in division of the loot obtained in collective hunt, war etc between
involved parties, clans, tribes etc.)
*de, *deh₂ ”partitive particle, preposition, conjunction”
*deh₃- (? *deh₂w-) “to give” (as in division of the goods within the potlatch economics, regular
distribution of the goods within the clan, tribe etc.)
*der- ”to tear apart”
*delh₁- ”to split, divide” (NB PGrm. *taljaną “to count”)
? *h₁ed- ”to eat” (as in participation in collective meal, feast etc. NB that the verb has qualities of
an old stative verb)
§2. The element *d is observed in many PIE numerals, as well as the root *kʷet-/*kʷot- (< *kwet-/*kut-)
“count, amount, sum”:
1: *h₁ed-Hojnos “part single”: PSlv. *edinъ; >> simplified to *Hojnos
2: *h₁ed-w(i)- “part apart, split in two”: PArm. ? *et-γwi-, *et-γu- > *etki-, *etku- > *erki-, *erku-; >>
simplified to *dwi-
3: ?
4: *kʷetwór- ”account’s ? row, ? turn, ? bend” (the element *wor- has many semantic possibilities,
perhaps from *wer- “turn, bend; knot, tie > rope”, thus representing a single turn in counting: a
total sum in 4-system or one half in 8-system)
5: *penkʷe (< ? *pen-kʷet < ? *h₁epi-Hojn-kʷet ”plus one [to] account”)
6: *(s)wekʲs (< ? *(s)-wi-kʲuts < *(s)-wi-kuti- “two [to, besides] account”)
7: ?
8: *Hokʲtṓ, *Hokʲtaw- (< *Hokitu- < *Hoj-kut(i)- “one whole account” or, rather, a contamination
with another root *Hokʲ- + suffix *-t-). As it will be shown in §4, the name of 8 could come from a
compound, which gave rise to multiple semantic derivations with meanings “entire, whole,
common, closely related”
9: *h₁ed-Hinawin- (< ? *h₁ed-Hojn-haw-Hinós “part single over one [whole amount]”: PGrk. *edznáwin > *ennájwn > *ennéwǝ; PArm. *ets-nun(i)- > *ennun-; PBlt. *dnewin > *dewin, *newin; PSlv.
*dnewin-tiș > *dȅvętь; >> simplified to *naw(i)n-, *new(i)n-, *njun-
10: *h₁ed-kʲm̥(t) >> *dekʲm̥(t)
§3. As we can see from above, the new approach to interpret PIE numeral names indicates that PIEs used
the 8-base counting system (perhaps extension of the 4-base system – this “double-the-series” principle
will be used again within the innovative 10/20-base system).
§4. We assume, that the name of numeral 8 comes from the compound *Hoj-kut- “one whole account”.
This compound later was reinterpreted as dual *Hojktáw, *Hojktṓ (“double-the-series” principle for the 4-
base system) with the following metathesis > *Hokitáw, *Hokitṓ > and finally *Hokʲtáw, *Hokʲtṓ.
The assumed original *Hojkut-, *Hojkʷt- can still be seen in Lycian aitãta “eight” (< PAnt. *ajktā-(e)dā
“eighth part”), and the same structure perhaps in Alb. tetë “eight” (< PAlb. *tajtā < *ajtatā with progressive
assimilation < *ajktā-dā). Cf. also Gk. ogdóas ~ ogdóados “group of eight”.
