From: Miguel Carrasquer
Message: 27227
Date: 2003-11-15
>--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Glen Gordon" <glengordon01@...>No. The variation *se ~ *swe is morphological (cf. *te ~ *twe).
>wrote:
>> Torsten:
>> >How about PIE *se, *swe "oneself"?
>>
>> What about it? You have to elaborate.
>>
>>
>> = gLeN
>>
>
>PIE *seks-, *sweks-,
>PIE *se-, *swe-
>
>The case of the vanishing w. I was wondering if something similar was
>going on.