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

On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 13:50:23 -0700 (PDT), glen gordon
<glengordon01@...> wrote:

>Me:
>> What shows conclusively that we are dealing with
>> short *e in these roots?
>
>Miguel:
>> The fact that *e is not long.
>
>Cute. Very cute :) I'm simply asking, of the evidence
>we *think* we have of short *e next to a marked
>dorsal, is it really solid?
>
>Let's take *legH- for example. We do have the
>lengthened grade *le:gH- in Germanic *le:gaz 'low'.
>What's that all about?

Can't be the same root. Slavic lê"z- is a.p. A, not mobile,
which requires Hirt's law (and an originally athematic
paradigm), which in turn requires a laryngeal, so it's
*leh1g^h-.

=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...