Re: *a/*a: ablaut

From: alexandru_mg3
Message: 52857
Date: 2008-02-12

--- In, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...> wrote:
> On 2008-02-12 20:17, alexandru_mg3 wrote:
> > Not true: In Skt. vájra- < *weh2g^-ro- 'thunderbolt' => we have
> > loss of laryngeals before mediae in Indo-Iranian (see Lubotsky 81)
> > => see also Skt. pajrá
> Lubotsky's explanation is ad hoc. It doesn't account for cases like
> *gHla:dH-/*gHladH-; it doesn't explain the absence of *wo:g^- <
> *woh2g^-; it proposes paradigms that simply don't work. E.g., how
is the
> weak stem of the 'nose' word, *nh2s-, supposed to produce Slavic
> or Ved. nas-, especially if (pace Kortlandt) the word has an
> laryngeal, and so the nasal is _not_ initial? But even if it were,
> vocalisation of *h2, according to Lubotsky's own rules, took place
> Germanic, Italic, Celtic and Greek, not in Slavic or Indic. See also
> Cases like *k^aso- have been discussed here as well:
> In general, few Indo-Europeists would subscribe to Lubotsky's
> rejection of *a(:).
> Piotr

Piotr, let's take the situations one by one not all in one.

I would ask first:

1. Do you accept 'the loss of laryngeals before mediae in Indo-

like in:
Skt. vájra-
Skt. pajrá

Once we conclude on this we will pass to the next case.