Re: [tied] *ekwos and friends

--- In cybalist@..., "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@...> wrote:

> No, satemisation sometimes fails in Slavic, but in order to get

from *ek^wo- to <kos'-> you'd have to propose the following ARBITRARY
developments:

>
> (1) satemisation fails and we get *ekv- rather than *esv-
> (2) initial e- is dropped (it doesn't, normally)
> (3) *-v- dissapears (it doesn't, normally)
> (4) -os'- (of what origin?) is added to enlarge *k- (all that
> remains!) into kos'-
>
> With so much freedom you could convert anything into anything else.
>
> Piotr

Sorry, Piotr - and what if the way from *ek^wo- to <kos'-> was
completly different:
1) satemization succeeds and give *esv-
2) *-v- dissapears (it doesn't, as you say in (3). Maybe k'w was
monofonemic and merges with k', like k and kw)
3) initial e- > o- (maybe e- > a- > o- - in my native dialect I
hear form kas'a, kas'achka - (little) horse, nursery word)
4) originates proteic g: os'- > gos'- (like (g)usenica)
5) gos'- > kos', maybe by analogy of kon'.
Is this (or similar) development possible?

SY, Alexander Dakhov