Re: *bhe-, -y, -w

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...> wrote:

> Apophonic variation in a heteroclitic noun?

Yes. *pah2wr./*ph2wen-/*p(a)h2wo:r/*ph2un-, etc.

> > > >In Italic, *bHuh2-je/o- >
> > > > *fu:je/o- > *fi:je/o- > Lat. fio: through a well-known rule,
> cf.
> > > > *puH-jo- > pius and -dHuH-je/o- > (suf)fio: 'fumigate'.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I believe I've read that well-known rule was disputed?
> >
> > The examples support it rather solidly. Do you know of any
> > counterevidence?
> >
>
> Those are the examples I found in the American Heritage Dictionary.
> Are there other examples?

I though _I_ gave those examples ;), and I didn't get them from the
AHG, which, to my knowledge, doesn't discuss the ultimate etymology
of Lat. pius or suffio: (compare the latter with Gk. tHuo:, where the
*u is visible and the intervocalic *j lost). You can add
<pio:> 'purify with sacred rites' to strengthen the connection
between <pius> and <pu:rus>, industria < *endo-stru:ja: < *-strow-
jah2, and perhaps a couple of other Italic items. Who has disputed
this rule, and where?

Piotr