>On Lachmann's Law
If I understand you correctly, Jens, you're suggesting:
(1) PIE *ag-tos > *ak-tos
(2) within pre-Latin *ak-tos (~ ago) is reconceived as [ag-]+[tos]
whatever its phonological form
(3) this reconception means that speakers, conscious of the /g/ in the
root, draw out the vowel, hence a:ctus.
This doesn't explain the absence of these forms where the root ended in a
voiced aspirate, for example iussum (~ iubeo < *iudh).
It doesn't explain exceptions such as e:m-tos (~emo), which the analogical
explanation acounts for easily (perfect e:mi ~> ptcpl e:mptos)
Timing may also be a problem: other Italic dialects do not show
lenghtening, so it is a purely internal affair in Latin. Does that leave
enough time for your theory?
Peter