From: tgpedersen
Message: 33031
Date: 2004-06-02
> On Tue, 01 Jun 2004 10:26:37 +0000, tgpedersennouns,
> <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
>
> >> The root of <ipini> and its variants such as <ibeni>,
> >> <imini> is more difficult to pin down. My guess is that
> >> i-pin-i represents *e-b(V)hin-i, while i-ben-i, with i-
> >> pointing to a high vowel in the root, is *e-beh(i)n-i or
> >> *e-bain-. <imini> is straightforward from *e-bin-i. If we
> >> combine all these, we get a possible root *-behin- or
> >> *-bahin-, where /h/ can be read as the hiatus left by the
> >> loss of an earlier consonant (not /n/).
> >>
> >
> >I recognize that line of reasoning wrt. /e/ > /i/ in the verbal
> >prefixes from Trask. Could the same rule have applied also on
>You have no way of knowing that. You reconstruct /e/ > /i/ for the
> Apparently not.
>If I were to claim that <ibai> was related to one the other words
> >so that ibai < *ebai (there's nothing to stop one from assuming a
> >lost h- in all verbs)?
>
> What do you mean?
>
> >In that case the two roots are getting pretty close.Now that's a good question ;-) I started out with <ibai> and <behe>,
>
> Which two roots?
>