From: gprosti
Message: 66068
Date: 2010-04-09
>Or, unless there is typological reason (whence my original question) to believe that a back consonant, not a vowel, must have been the cause of this and other lengthenings.
>
>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@> wrote:
> >
> > W dniu 2010-04-08 04:34, gprosti pisze:
> >
> > > The second element of dvi:pa- begins with a vowel in its independent
> > > form (ap-). The second element of dvidhA- begins with a consonant in its
> > > independent form (dha:-). The two-mora pattern may not have applied to
> > > the latter type of case.
> >
> > But why, e.g., <su:nára->, if the second element is nar- < *h2ner-,
> > never with an initial vowel in Indic?
>
> I agree that something was originally there prior to the <n-> of <nar> (witness Greek, etc.). However, a schwa seems just as plausible as a laryngeal, unless Anatolian shows otherwise.