--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Torsten" <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
I. > How do you account for the -w- (and Latin, according to Møller, has *-oU- > *o:-) ?
Lat. (g^)no:sco: is reconstructed *g^neh3-ske/o with an unusual full-grade in the root considered as 'a late formation'
Same 'late formation' is assume for Albanian njoh reconstructed this time as *g^ne:h3-ske/o (under 'the influence of' *g^ne:h3-s)
The standard form should have been *g^nh3-ske/o but I don't know if is attested somewhere (I think that is unattested)
If you made reference to (g)no:u(it) 'I know' (please see II)
II. > I propose derivation from a Weinberg adjective *gegnow-, cf. OInd 1,3 sg perf act jajña:ú from *jña:- "know".
As I know this is the 'u-perfect' theory reflected by the 'standard' example:
*g^e-g^nóh3-w Skt. jajñ'au and Lat. (g)no:u(it) 'I know'
(a short presentation here:
BUT I DON'T SEE ANY -w- in Lith. inóti I can only see a long a: inside....