--- In cybalist@..., Piotr Gasiorowski <piotr.gasiorowski@...>
> I've always wondered why. Is it just because, semantically, it
seems to match Slavic *ryti rather than Lith. ra'uti? But they
reflect the same root, and the deverbal noun formation represented by
*rovU and <ra~vas> is productive everywhere in Balto-Slavic. Can't
they simply continue PBSl. *rawas whose meaning in Baltic has failed
to shift in accord with that of the corresponding verb?
>
> Piotr
The tradition seemes to go back to Fraenkel, but I don't have his
etymological dictionary to hand and can't cite his argumentation. The
word is suspiciously absent from Latvian.
Sergei