From: Piotr Gasiorowski
> This was, of course, my point. Sorry I could not transmit it properly.It's "somehow" evidence for the underlying _stem_ *we:kW-, but the
> To say it another way, there appears to be no evidence of *wé:kW-s;
> or are you saying that *wó:kW-s is somehow evidence for *wé:kW-s???
> I think it is clear and you might agree that some of theSorry, but I don't recognise a valid reconstruction in any of these, and
> irregularities with this root have to do with the co-existence of a
> regular singular. *wékW-s/*wékW-o-s, and a thematically extended -*s
> form, *wokW-é(:)-s(-s).