Re: again Slavic "dragU"

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Abdullah Konushevci"
<a_konushevci@...> wrote:

> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Sergejus Tarasovas"
> <S.Tarasovas@...> wrote:
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Abdullah Konushevci"
> > <a_konushevci@...> wrote:
> >
>
> > > >
> >
>
> But the
> > question was, how PIE *dHrougH- (> Sl. *drugU 'friend') and

(your)

> > PIE *dHorgH- (> Sl. *dorgU 'dear') can be related? You just can't
> > ignore the fact that one observes *-rou- in the first protoform

and

> *-
> > or- in the second, which would probably indicate the protoforms

are

> > not related.
> >
> > Sergei
> ************
> I guess that you are aware of liquids' metathesis in South-Slavic
> languages, which, I think, can't affect as diphthongs as vowels.

So,

> my reconstruction of protoform *dHo:rgHU 'dear', as an metathetic
> variant of contracted and lengthened form of *dHrougH- seems very
> convincible, after we see that regular outcome of /*o:/ > /a/ (it

was

> my mistake that I follow Mr. Vidal and you that /*o:/ can't yields
> Slavic /a/, see previous messages).

I give up. Anybody?

Sergei