From: stlatos
Message: 68891
Date: 2012-03-10
>There's no way to be sure if it's /xartka-/ , /xartaka-/ , or /xartakka-/ , but /xartka-/ is implied by other branches. Keep in mind the order of TK in PIE isn't proven by this any more than the presence of a in Skt vs e/o in Latin proved a but no e/o in PIE. Newer-discovered l. showing some previously unknown features can excite linguists to overexuberant reliance on its supposed retentions.
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Tavi" <oalexandre@> wrote:
> > I'm afraid there's no such "thorny cluster" here. As I've explained in
> > another post, the geminate velar of Hittite hartagga- must be a suffix
> > like the one found in the Turkic cognate qarsaq 'steppe fox'. With the
> > help of external data, I reconstruct an affricate sibilant (possibly
> > alveolo-palatal) in the internal cluster *rC.
>
> What's the evidence for a 'geminate velar' in 'hartagga-'? While I haven't located the spellings of the word, 'hartagga-' seems to be a reading of a spelling of /hartka-/.
>