Re: [tied] Bader's article on *-os(y)o

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "elmeras2000" <jer@...> wrote:

> I have been asked that question before, Were there then no real
> verbs? I want to warn against a pitfall here: It does not follow
> that the prestage we come back to did not have any verbs. The old
> finite verbs are practically gone in Hindi, but that does not mean
> that Sanskrit did not have any. This may be a comparable story, but
> I wouldn't know.

I understand what you're saying. If you are correct, do you have any
ideas as to what the "original" finite verb morphology was like?

> "Belonging to -, characterized by -".

Right. However, why is the *-o accented there, but (presumably) not
accented in other words such as *ekWos?

- Rob