From: alexandru_mg3
Message: 38996
Date: 2005-06-30
> >Indo-European reconstruction: k^le:uH-I doubt. Dersken clearly indicates the derivations, even the endings
>
> Derksen doesn't mean that *k^le:uH- would have given
> *s'lo:u(?)-, which is impossible. He means that the PIE
> _root_ can be reconstructed as *k^le:uH- (which is
> doubtful). BS *s'lo:u(?)- would then be o-grade.
>
> That rule is surely wrong (see Derksen: kleg-/klek-,Could you indicate me Dersken's pages for these words.
> kleNc^ati, kleNtI, klik-, kljuc^I, and I stopped checking
> there).
>
> >So for sure the PIE was k^le:uH-. and not *k^low-a) Miguel, only to clarify: you have said *k^low not *k^lew.
>
> Slava and s^love: are certainly not from *k^le:uH-.
>
> They are innner-Balto-Slavic lengthened grade from *s^law- >
> *s^la:w-. *s^law- itself can come from *k^low-, or as
> Sergejus rightly remarked, from *k^lew-. It depends on
> whether the lengthening from a to a: took place before or
> after the development ew > aw (and eu > jau).