Re: Hittite preterites

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Jens Elmegaard Rasmussen <jer@...>
wrote:

> So 'to be' is not enough? I would appeal to the augment also to

explain

> the long circumflex vowels of Lithuanian e:~jo 'went',

e:~me: 'took' (e:

> being the dotted e) which would be regular from *e-H1ey-, *e-H1em-

+ prt.

> morphemes.

Why do we have an acute in <díeveris> < *deh2iwé:r then? Because of a
syllabification like [deh2j.wé:r] rather than [de.h2i.wé:r]? Because
*i even in its vocalic (rather than glidic) incarnation still keeps
some immanent qualities *e doesn't possess? Or do you reconstruct
*daih2wé:r? If so, what would be the source for *a? It's not flanked
by uvulars in that case.

Sergei