Лингвофорум

Actually, the verb /ʒiʧit(j)/ is made on the same principle - */ʒit(ə)ʧit(j)/, "-gitək" (cf., *po-/u-/za-gitək < *gī: /ʒivot, ʒi(c/t), &c/).

Цитата: Luchik от октября 14, 2014, 22:47
In the Czech language, there also exists a direct verbal derivative of the word dostatek - dostačovat, which is alternative of stačit with periodic occurency.
The question is, which verb was derived from the other

Well, I'm not sure to consider the *-ou- denominative a more direct derivative than the one with *-ī-, if it is what you mean.

In the Czech language, there also exists a direct verbal derivative of the word dostatek - dostačovat, which is alternative of stačit with periodic occurency.
The question is, which verb was derived from the other

Цитата: Luchik от октября 14, 2014, 22:27
Does the term "Moravian" in linguistic sense means czechoslovak dialect continuum ?
If so, then it is highly unusual - Moravian nowadays means located in the eastern region of Czechia.

Don't worry, Luchik, I know what "Morava" nowadays is, my fellow learner is 'Moravak', f. ex.... 'ja su'... 
There's nothing 'highly unusual' in here, as long as I use this term figuratively, after "Great Morava" - binding both territories of modern days Czech and Slovack Rep"cs -, which was at time usually rendered without 'Great'.

Does the term "Moravian" in linguistic sense means czechoslovak dialect continuum ?
If so, then it is highly unusual - Moravian nowadays means located in the eastern region of Czechia.

Why, of course it's from *stat-uk- → *statuk-ī-t(i/u) → /statʧit(j)/ → /staʧit(j)/.

   Not having refined the issue, I rested, for some time, satisfied with an explanation that [ʧ] in the word in question is due to **t+*j (+-ī- as verb theme). But today, this word drew my attention once again, and I noticed that this is untrue for Moravian (as well as for Lechitic) languages.

   I had been associating the verb with the ComSlav. lexeme -stat- (←*sta-t-), like ComSlav. *(do)statuk (especially with this word current in Moravian languages), *stati, *(ne)statia. For the Moravian languages, it could result only in ⁺[ʦ], sta[ʦ]it(j), which is not the case here. An analogy through conjugation forms doesn't fix anything here, cf. Proto-Czech */xətjy/ > ModernCz /xʦi/ 'I want', moreover, even durative or imperfect forms still preserve [ʦ], cf. sotit(j) : *satjat(j)→satsat(j). Though, even assumed some kind of 'reaccretion', say sta[ʦ]+it-, i.e. not from the Proto-Moravian language time, but later when the [ʦ] phoneme's already established – this would've been also unlikely as far as hardly any such instance is found elsewhere in Moravian languages.
   The ComSlav. root *sta- (:*sto-) is known coupled with the other diverse suffixes, as well, such as: -n-: ComSl. *stan, -v-: ComSl. *stav, -l(i)-: EastSl. *dostali, and the *sto- root is known also with the -g- suffix, as in ComSl. *stog (aside different versions thereon).
   Now, provisionally I'm wondering whether it couldn't be *-k- in this word.

NB:
1) ** (two asterisks) means the reconstructed form is highly questionable.
2) ⁺ (superscript "+") means a void form.
3) i, u mean ComSl. reduced vowels; the Moravian (Czech, Slovack) words are rendered through the phonemic transcription.