Re: [tied] Latin tardus

--- Andrew Jarrette <anjarrette@...> wrote:

> Sean Whalen <stlatos@...> wrote:
>
>
> In Latin *oi>*ei>i: between l and p/b/w; apparently
> *u>a in the same place (and *u>i there in
> Germanic?).
> __________________
> Never heard of that. If so, why Latin <libet>,
> older <lubet>, "pleases", related to OE <lufu>
> "love"? And if *u>i there in Germanic, then one
> would not find <lufu> nor <lof> "praise" nor OE
> <lybb> "drug" (OHG <luppi>) related to Irish <luibh>
> "herb".

Depending on the time the rule occurs PIE *bh could
have been *f in Latin; with dissimilation of *oi>ei;
*eu>ei; *u>i later (if *lub>*lab fits in with *wr.()w

> *ar()w it's probably fairly old).

I suppose you're asking why *b would cause this
change and not *bh? I don't know any specific reason.

> I don't know of any certain (regular) rule that
> explains sapio:; maybe dissimilation at stage
> *sepiye-?
> _____________
> But OHG <intseffen>, OS <afsebbian> presuppose Gmc
> *safjan- with Gmc *a which cannot be from IE *e.
> Andrew

Since the origin is uncertain and it has few
cognates (if any) I can't tell if the a is from PIE *e
or *o or exactly what environment caused the change.
Without more evidence only guesses are available.



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com