Re: [tied] A hard nut

--- In cybalist@..., "Sergejus Tarasovas" <S.Tarasovas@...> wrote:

> --- In cybalist@..., "João S. Lopes Filho" <jodan99@...> wrote:
>
> > Slavic *ore^xU (/ *orIxU < *re:sos , *reisos (prefix o-?)
> > *re:is- could be *wreis- ???
> > Or *re:ik^H- ???
>
> Slavic *x here is normal, it's -k^- which is reflexed as *s, not *x
> in Slavic (both in or not in RUKI position). On the other hand, I'm
> not aware of any reliable reflxes of *-k^H- in Slavic, but at least

*-

> kH- has been suspected to yield *x sometimes (like in *soxa 'wooden
> plough'< (?)*k^akHah2).
>
> As for *wr-, it's regular Slavic reflex is indeed *r-. <absolute
> speculation>Again, if we assume Greek a'ruon to be a real cognate
> (not a borrowing from the same source or a product of similar pre-

PIE

> substrate), why not from something like < *Hru- or *Hur- with a
> metathesis in Greek or Balto-Slavic; then *H- would be reflexed as
> Slavic *o- (not impossible), Baltic 0 (normal for such position)

and

> Greek a-. -e:iso- still needs explanation. Some suffix added on

Balto-

> Slavic stage?</absolute speculation>.
>

Some second thoughts (the speculative level remains the same).
*rw- word-(resp. syllable-)initially seemes to be unusual for Balto-
Slavic, if not completetely prohibited (the cow-word, eg, should be
syllabized like *ka:r'-we: / *ka:r'-wa:), so the explanation through
metathesis is superfluous. *Hru-o- would give *r(w)a- in Baltic and
*or(v)o- in Slavic, whose pathology (unconvenient shortness and *rw-
cluster) had to be treated by dropping *w and adding some suffix. By
the way, in that case Lith. (auks^t.) ruos^uty~s might be not of a
secondary origin, but continue *ro(:)u- (tautosyllabic *o:u can be
reflexed both as a'u and u'o in Lithuanian), being analogically
leveled after ri'es^utas later. And S-Cr. o`rax might continue *oruxU.

Sergei