--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Abdullah Konushevci
<akonushevci@...> wrote:
> > Isn't much easier to see in the root *o:rdh- 'order, row' just a
> > variant of PIE *k'erdho-/k'erdha:- 'row, troop, line'. We have an
> > example in *kost- 'leg, bone' and *ost(h)- 'id.'.
> I hope that we agree that *k'erdho-/k'erdha:- are aberrant, for we
> have unvoiced stop - voiced aspirate. It may be that in both roots
> *-dh is determinative, so both forms to be derivatives of *H1ar-
'to
> fit together'.
I don't understand a word of this. I presented a possibility of
combining Lat. ordo: with the verbal root *reH1dh- 'to order, take
care of'. That is in no way helped by introducing *k'erdh-. I see no
evidence for a root *Herdh- in this, and a variant *k'erdh- of it
would not even be parallel with the *H2ost-/*kost- doublets. We do
not really agree that *k'erdh- is aberrant, for the root structure
constraint banning k-dh only applies to the structure kVdh in which
the two stops are separated only by the root vowel. I also fail to
see the foundation of the funny laryngeal analysis of ar- as having
*H1-. I do not exclude such a possibility, but what evidence has
caused you to prefer it to *H2- with the a-colouring laryngeal? Is
this a serios posting at all?
Jens