From: Richard Wordingham
Message: 24521
Date: 2003-07-14
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:Because horb- > hurb and then hurb- > urb- are irregular, but
> > On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 10:08:27 +0000, tgpedersen <tgpedersen@...>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >*g^hordh- > urb-? Why the loss of g^h- (instead of > f-)?
> >
> > *g(^)h- > h- in Latin.
> Of course. Sorry.
> >
> > >What are the intermediate steps (if any)?
> >
> > *ghordh- > *horb- > urb-
> >
>
> That latter half looks odd. Why not hortus > **urtus then?