From: Miguel Carrasquer
>If I were, I would have used an asterisk.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Miguel Carrasquer<mailto:mcv@...>
> On Sun, 17 Jul 2005 05:37:03 -0500, Patrick Ryan
> <proto-language@...<mailto:proto-language@...>> wrote:
> > 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
> First off, according to Whitney, da:tá is attested. Do you dispute this?
> We both know that PIE *o had a peculiar response in Old Indian: namely, > a:.Only in open syllables.
> Now you seem to be saying that *&1, *&2, and *&3 before the stress-accent, all give Old Indian -i-;Before, after and under.
>in other words, the peculiar treatment of *o ceased to be operational.In other words, since neither *a, nor *e, nor *o give Vedic