[tied] Re: Ie. *laywos/leh2iwos (was: ka and k^a)

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "P&G" <G&P@...> wrote:

> >> > facio:, fe:ci:
> >> > capio:, ce:pi:
> >> > where the latter half should have o-grade (althought it

doesn't).

> > Because it's perf. sg.
>
> Latin regularises all its perfects. Some show zero grade

throughout, with

> no sign of an original -o-. So we can't assume fe:ci or ce:pi

had -o-

> grade at the time they appear.
>

Well, good thing I didn't assume it then. But thank you for
rephrasing my remark: they should have had o-grade, but don't.


Torsten