> How do you explain ?
> Lithuanian bré:ks^
Cluster simplification (*-g^sk^- > Baltic *-s^k-, metathesised to -ks^-
before a consonant but preserved before a vowel).
===========
If I understand you well,
Bré:ks^ is from *bhreH1-g-sk
thru bre:gsk > bre:shk > *bre:ksh ??
Another example of this ?
To be frank
I think the syllabic over-heavy *bre:gsk- is dubious.
Equivalent to CCeCCCC- !!!!
But I let you defend your position.
Arnaud
==============
> Russian brezg
I suppose there was a time when a non-iterative present coexisted with
the *-sk^e/o- stem. The alternation *bre^z-/*bre^sk- could have resulted
in the levelling out of voicing, cf. Pol. s'lizgac' sie, 'slide, slip'
(PSl. adj. slizUkU 'slippery' < *slig^-u-).
================
I definitely don't like this story
made out of "could have" and "levelling out" ....
So you can't provide a clean explanation of brezg.
Arnaud
============
> ks^ and zg are definitely not the same thing to me.
>
> And my next point is
> to be bright and to dawn are only vaguely related.
Are they? What about <aurum> and <Auro:ra>?
Piotr
===============
Latin aurum is
presumably a loanword form *zahab (Semitic) "gold"
LAtin Aurora is
most probably inherited from *s?ab- "morning"
cognate to Semitic s?abaH "morning"
Nothing in common.
Apart *b > w
Arnaud
=============