Re: [Courrier indésirable] Re: [tied] Re: S mobile (Was : PS Emphat

From: fournet.arnaud
Message: 52348
Date: 2008-02-05

fournet.arnaud wrote:

> Does it have a s- in the first place ? One just can explain #r- with
> r- ? no need to presuppose sr-

The *sr- in *sreu- is not "presupposed" but securely reconstructed on
the basis of Skt. srávati, srutá, Germanic *stroumo-, Slavic *strumy,
Lith. srau~jas, OIr. sruaim, sruth, etc.

And, yes, rivers are often said to "run" in all languages I know.

Piotr
==============
And what about
Celtic row-dh-anos > Rhone ?
No need for this #sr- inception.

Rava
I'am waiting for your alternative explanation.

Tchadic :
ruwa "water".
Chinese
liu2 "to flow"

We don't need to pre-suppose
*sr- is the original form.
Your reasoning is completely circular.
Are you aware of that circularity ?

You are *damn* wrong
with your orthodox *sr- thing.
It does not exist.

Arnaud
=================