Re: [tied] -m (-n)?

From: Richard Wordingham
Message: 27533
Date: 2003-11-24

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
> The alternative would be that *dek^-emt- is back-formed from the
> ordinal, which would not be unprecedented?

What's the precedent?

Richard.

Previous in thread: 27525
Next in thread: 27543
Previous message: 27532
Next message: 27534

Contemporaneous posts     Posts in thread     all posts