Re: [tied] Re: *H1wes-

*woh1-r- (as in Skt. va:r- 'water', Toch. B war, OE wo:r, etc.) and something like *woh1-s- could well be reduced to a common denominator even without a Grand Unification of all *w-initial water words. This would have the advantage of making the long vowels unproblematic. Furthermore, a laryngeal in *weh1-r- is independently needed to account for the post-PIE nil grade *u:r-, and since *weh1r- is not an acceptable root shape, its form implies root status for *weh1-, and partial unification begins to make sense. I do not see any good reason, though, why *h1wed- should be reconstructed instead of just *wed- in the "wet, water" root.

Piotr

----- Original Message -----
From: tgpedersen@...

To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 5:18 PM

Subject: [tied] Re: *H1wes-

I wonder how you discovered my cleverly disguised intention of uniting the wet *w-'s. You must be psychic or something. Anyway, the reason was that Møller posits for *u:r- etc a root approx. *w-H-r-, and since he occasionly lets H's (laryngeals) wander in and out of roots ny means of metathesis, a term I find employed often in the Hamito-Semitic Encyclopedic Dictionary by Orël & Stolbova (but sometimes it just comes and goes in the same root without them being much alarmed by it), I thought metathesis (if the use of that term is permissible in PIE) would solve the problem of getting rid of the -H- in Møller's *w-H-r- on my way to *w- unity (perhaps EIEC just parked the H1 outside of the root so that it was ready for being metathesized(?) into position in case of vowel lengthening?). Torsten
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.