Re: [tied] Re: Short and long vowels

On Sun, 17 Jul 2005 05:37:03 -0500, Patrick Ryan
<proto-language@...> wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: pielewe<mailto:wrvermeer@...>
>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com<mailto:cybalist@yahoogroups.com>, "Patrick Ryan" <proto-language@...<mailto:proto-language@...>...>
> wrote:
>
> > *dhe-tó- sta-tó- *do-tó can be reconstructed to justify the
> actual Greek forms.
> >
> > The 'laryngeals' are unnecessary in zero-grade, and contribute no
> useful information.
>
> Yes, but you can't explain the Vedic forms on the basis of *dhe-tó-
> sta-tó- and *do-tó, so the laryngeals must have been present at the
> latest common stage underlying Greek and Vedic.
>
> Unless I have misunderstood something really basic.
>
> ***
> Patrick:
>
> Well, let's try.
>
> for *dhe:-, the Vedic participle is dhitá
>
> for *sta:-, the Vedic participle is sthitá
>
> for *do:-, the Vedic participle is da:tá but Epic di-tá
>
> I am not sure I see the problem.

The problem is that your ?*dhe-tó-, ?*sta-tó- and ?*do-tó-
would have given Vedic *dhatá-, *statá- and da:tá-, so the
former cannot be the PIE forms.

The proper reconstructions are *dh&1-tó-, *st(h)&2-tó- and
*d&3-tó-.

=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...