Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Isaac Fried <if AT math.bu.edu>]

1. It is not clear to me how to advance "real evidence" for something  
that is manifestly self evident.

2. There is, indeed, only a "vague phonetic similarity" for PAQAX,  
PATAX, PALAX, and PACAX, yet they are all 'cleave, open, separate'.

Isaac Fried, Boston University

On Apr 22, 2012, at 10:21 PM, Will Parsons wrote:

> > I think we can then go even deeper into this linguistic gestalt by
> > recognizing, as Isaac Fried did,  that "The root PTX is apparently a
> > variant of . . . PSG, PSX, PCX, P$X, P$Q, (PSQ), PTX with acts
> > connoting 'spread'.
>
> I'd like to have more real evidence that these are related than a  
> vague
> phonetic similarity.