Re: *bhe-, -y, -w

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@...>
wrote:

> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...>

wrote:

>
> > ... That doesn't change his
> > point: to accomodate all forms of the "be; habitate" verb you need
> > something that turns into -i (OHG pim, pist, Latin fio:) and -u. I
> > merely pointed out that same variation occurs in the corresponding
> > AfroAsiatic root.
>
> The -i- belongs to the suffix, not to the root, which loses its *w as
> a result of cluster reduction: Gmc. *bwijo: > *bijo: (> OE be:o),

etc.


I understand. The -w- was there, but it has left.

> (cf. *ph2w- > *fw- > f- in Goth. fo:n).

Odd. The w/u is still there in Dutch 'vuur' etc

>In Italic, *bHuh2-je/o- >
> *fu:je/o- > *fi:je/o- > Lat. fio: through a well-known rule, cf.
> *puH-jo- > pius and -dHuH-je/o- > (suf)fio: 'fumigate'.
>

I believe I've read that well-known rule was disputed?


Torsten