From: Miguel Carrasquer
Message: 26131
Date: 2003-09-29
>On Sun, 28 Sep 2003, Miguel Carrasquer wrote:I suppose we disagree on that.
>
>> The point I failed to make clearly was that ste^na/stains would be a
>> thematized r/n-stem, and since the r/n-stem in question is *sta:yr. (the
>> usual prototype of Greek stéa:r), the thematized version should be
>> *sta:inos/*sta:ina:. I don't think <íes^kau> is quite parallel in
>> structure (but I'm not sure what the underlying structure of
>íes^kau
>is).
>> In terms of the place of the laryngeal, *staHinos would be more
>> analogous,
>> I think, to the a:-stem dat/loc *-ah2(a)i, which has circumflex in B-S.
>
>A preform *staHinos would change into *stayHnos in (i.e., before) PIE
>already.
>Lith. íes^kau 'I seek' sure *is* parallel: the root is positedSo not parallel at all: *h2e:i dos not equal *ah2i (or *aih2).
>by Pokorny as *ais-, the sk^-prs. seen in Skt. icchati is regularly
>combined with an s-aorist, so lengthened grade is expected, the result
>being *H2e:ys- which neatly explains the Baltic acute.
>> I'm satisfied with *h3ep- for the moment. It's only a single example,Skt. ápnas- "Ertrag, Habe, Besitz" shows no indication of a laryngeal.
>> and
>> it _may_ perhaps be *h3epH- (but surely needn't be), so more evidence
>> would
>> certainly be welcome.
>
>You are ducking the issue: You *need* the root to be anit for the example
>to be interesting in this context. Then will you not make sure your
>evidence meets the only requirement of interest?