Re: [tied] Re: Catunari

28-06-03 12:56, Abdullah Konushevci wrote:

> There is no misunderstanding, it seems you didn't understand
> Croation language: "-lo, live (or productive) suffix of neuter
> gender, all-Slavic and pre-Slavic, derived from past active
> participle: <bilo> 'was' (Vuk) from <biti> "to be".
> And, as you may see, he is not talking about participle ending -l-
> (PIE *-lo-), but he clear stressed that it is derived from past
> active participle <bilo> 'was'.

Sorry, but there's only a case of complex multilevel misunderstanding on
_your_ part, Abdullah. I'm sure you understand Croatian well enough, but
you must have misconstrued the wording of the text. I won't explain the
details again, since I can see Sergei has already done that. Let me just
note that the dictionary -- if you read the text correctly -- tells you
exactly what I told you a couple of postings ago.

Piotr