Re: [tied] Re: the true nature of

From: P&G
Message: 14139
Date: 2002-07-25

>On Lachmann's Law

If I understand you correctly, Jens, you're suggesting:
(1) PIE *ag-tos > *ak-tos
(2) within pre-Latin *ak-tos (~ ago) is reconceived as [ag-]+[tos]
whatever its phonological form
(3) this reconception means that speakers, conscious of the /g/ in the
root, draw out the vowel, hence a:ctus.

This doesn't explain the absence of these forms where the root ended in a
voiced aspirate, for example iussum (~ iubeo < *iudh).

It doesn't explain exceptions such as e:m-tos (~emo), which the analogical
explanation acounts for easily (perfect e:mi ~> ptcpl e:mptos)

Timing may also be a problem: other Italic dialects do not show
lenghtening, so it is a purely internal affair in Latin. Does that leave
enough time for your theory?