Re: *a/*a: ablaut

> ===========
> and *k^uo:n (a quasi-participle with a a lost
> *t at the end? cf. *xunða-) might be a formation parallel to *h1d-ónt-.
> The problem is of course that it's unanalysable in terms of known IE
> etyma unless Hamp was right about the connection with *pek^u-
> (*pk^w-ón(t)- might work).
> Piotr
> ========
> *kuH2-on is a derivative of *kuH2.8 "to bite".
> Some kind of a participle.
> Arnaud
> ========

Equally likely is a derivation from 1. *k^e:u-, 'waggle'.

Patrick
===========
From a macro-comparative viewpoint,
only kuH "bite" makes sense.
Cf. eskimo keReR-laq "wolf" from keR "bite".
And keH1- cannot yield Kabyle a-qzhun
only H2 can.

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