>Actually the name is Ray.
> That is a good question, Ron:
> I think we can identify all (or at least the great overwhelmingmajority of)
> *CV roots in PIE: *me, *no, *g(^)he, etc.Let's not forget the interrogative root *kWi.
> If we see -*i/*u or -*y/*w appended to one of these, then it is sure toWhat about the i-, u-, and o-stem suffixes of nouns? The are also
> be -*y/-*w because PIE has no derivative suffixes in *V;
> though, of course,And even some in VC like the feminine *eH2 and *iH2.
> there are some *CV's like -*Ha(:).
> Thus *méi-, 'my', is properly *mey-.Or better yet *mi > *mai > *mei under stress. Also *mi > *me before
> If the bare root consists with *CV: (either 'underlying' or caused byreconstructed
> laryngal), *CV:(H), in the case of *CV:i/y-, -*y should be
> because PIE has no derivative suffixes in *V;Except *i, *u, and *e/o.
> the same is true of *CV(:)H-Or rather the formative *-i > *-yV when another vowel was suffixed.
> except that when the consonantal nature of *H was still present, the
> formative -yV was probably vocalized as -*i.
> Any root that has the form *Céi/uC- must first be analyzed as havingthe
> root *Cey-/*Cew- to which the root extension -*C has been added.Or first analyzed as *Ci or *Cu which became diphthongized under
> The short answer: *i and *u are never anything but avocalic reflexesof *y
> and *w.I'd say it's actually the reverse of that.