----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, November 24, 2000 12:20 AM
Subject: Re: [tied] How many laryngeals?
>Eichner, claimimg that laryngeals do not colour a long *e:,
derives
this from *me:h2wr, from the root *meh2- as in Latin ma:turus
"ripe",
ma:ne "early" (IEW "gut, zu guter Zeit, rechtzeitig").
I know, but the claim is doubtful. I'm pretty sure, for example, that
the Nom.sg. of a:-feminines is like other consonantal nominatives, i.e. derives
from underlying *-e:h2 rather than just *-eh2. Eichner needs this rule just to
account for mehur. Anyway, a -wr/-w(e)n- neuter should contain a plain e-grade
root allomorph; the lengthening is quite unexpected.
>Where can I find these articles by Jasanoff? I'm
certainly not
claiming that every *-o- comes from *-e- preceeded by *-Cw-
(that's
only a sporadic development, which works for *mel-, maybe for
the
Luwian vb. endings -wan(i), -tan(i) [Hitt. -wen(i), -ten(i)] if
they
were in origin *-mw-en(i), *-tw-en(i), and some other cases, such
as,
quite consistently, *h3e). I was merely complaining about your
ad-hoc
explanation of "my" root *m(w)el- as a "perfect" o-grade.
I'll
send you the references later.
Piotr