Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory?

From: Sergejus Tarasovas
Message: 32153
Date: 2004-04-21

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski
<piotr.gasiorowski@...> wrote:

> PS But why *h2 and *nep-t- rather than just *nept-?

And as to *nep-t, Martin Huld writes in EIEC:
"...correct segmentation revealed by the feminine forms is *nep-ot-
in which -ot- is the same nominal suffix found in Germanic *me:no:รพ-
'month' (from 'moon') or Hit <si:w-att-> 'day' (from 'daytime sky')".

Sergei