Re: Grimm shift as starting point of "Germanic"

>=================
>
>Guus Kroonen's analysis, with which I agree, is:
>
>PGmc. N. *steko:, G. *stukkaz [or *stakkaz --mcv] < PIE
>*stégh-o:n, G. *stgh-n-ós
>
>============
>Watkins has *steg- instead of stegh-.

Watkins has *stegh- too.
===========
No,
My edition of the Heritage dictionary (1979)
states on page 1255
that
stake < OE staca
See steg2 : Pok s-teg 1014 : stick, pole.
but
It's not on the bartleby online site.
===========

>What about the word thane < *teknon ?
>if contact between any velar K and -n-
>trigger -kk-n,
>why is it that thane is not thekk- ?

I don't know. *teknós should have given *þekkaz, *téknos
would have given *þehnaz. Perhaps PIE *tetkno-?
=======================
Wrong again.

teknos > thegn > thane.

http://www.bartleby.com/61/roots/IE522.html

your theory about C-n > CC
just is about as bad as
your previous e: theory.
Collides with basic simple facts.

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