Re: Latin -u/o/i-lentus < *PIE - went-?
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org
, "stlatos" <stlatos@...> wrote:
> L-w > L-L
> *LewkYument- > *LowqYuwent- > *LoukYuLent- > lu:culentus
> so not in cruentus
> and analogy in most.
> If the explanation is dif. and doesn't involve analogy, I'd just say opt. of the type I've mentioned before.
The order of the changes could explain why lu:culentus not *lu:curentus (if l-l > l-r before L-w > L-L), assuming it's not a very recent form.
The possible change w-m > w-w in:
*LewkYument- > *LowqYuwent-
could exist, but isn't needed since opt. w > m and opt. m > w in all IE like:
plumbum = lead L;
luaide MI; luaidhe = lead I;
with the affix commonly found in metals +y = in/part of = (made) of? or in (ground/earth).