लग्

Etymology
Of origin.

Burrow derives the root from an earlier form, , and connects it to , which is usually attested as. Mayrhofer tentatively favors these hypothetical proto-forms, though seems to have rejected their connection to by the time of writing the EWAia. He does not, however, propose a particular Indo-European root that the Sanskrit would trace back to.

The root that most closely matches formally is, with semantic shift "to be limp, slack" > "to 'lazily' cling onto" (perhaps in a similar way to how dripping slime tends to not separate easily) > "to adhere". If from this root, then cognate with 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, and 🇨🇬 (whence 🇨🇬). However, the semantic shift required for this is far from trivial.

Another phonetically similar root is, whence 🇨🇬 and 🇨🇬 (whence 🇨🇬). This is semantically attractive, as well as temporospatially so given the root's attestation in both an eastern and western branch of Indo-European. However, Indo-European should become  in Sanskrit, while the root displays only a short vowel  in its various forms. That said, some relatives in modern Indo-Aryan, like 🇨🇬, show a long ā vowel, lending some feasibility to the derivation.

Older theories tentatively connected the root to, ; under this derivation, took on a more specific sense from "to attach" > "to attach color (i.e. to dye)". This is semantically tenuous and without textual evidence. Other theories connecting the word to are similarly unconvincing.

It is also worth noting that the root bears a very strong semantic similarity to, whence. However, the phonetics are mismatched, particularly the palatal *ǵ in the Proto-Indo-European root, and would have to be sufficiently explained, in addition to the existence of being under question.

Root

 * 1) to attach, stick to, cling
 * 2) to meet
 * 3) to pass