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

> >On the farce called "idem"
>>There's a lot of rearrangement going
> >on. [...] eodem was re-analysed as eo-dem, and eadem as ea-dem.
> Fine, but this still skirts around a direct question I bluntly asked
> days and days ago:
> WHAT IS THE RECONSTRUCTED IE FORM????

Of what? Of idem ~ idam? Presumably *id-em, with the same -em as we see
scattered all over pronouns in Sanskrit (tvam, aham, ayam etc).

Peter