Re: xW/w (was: Lithuanian diphthongs)

W dniu 2011-06-12 03:07, stlatos pisze:

> wedHd*-xW-n.ó+
> wed*-xW-n.ó+
> wed*-w-n.ó+
> wed*-n.ó+ dis.
>
> vEno = dowry OCS;
>
> It's the exact type and order of changes that is only possible; the
> common origin itself is fairly certain as it's needed to explain the dH
> / d alt. (resp. for V > VV), among others.

Why not +wedIno or +wedUno in Slavic? And, more importantly, why does
Greek show no reflex of the laryngeal in <éedna>, etc.? All the 'dowry'
words (in Balto-Slavic, Greek and Germanic) exhibit only *d, not *dH,
and suggest we should start with *h1wed-mo:n/*h1wed-m.n-, *h1wed-no-,
not etymologically connected with *wedH- 'lead'. The use of both roots
in connection with marriage could easily lead to their confusion (which
probably happened in Baltic, but hardly elsewhere).

Piotr