Re: [tied] *kW- "?"

From: tgpedersen
Message: 40369
Date: 2005-09-23

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Rob" <magwich78@...> wrote:
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, glen gordon <glengordon01@...>
wrote:
> > Etherman23:
> > > Actually it's quite easy to see why *k^ would be
> > > more common. If *e palatalized velars [...]
> >
> > Have to cut you off. IE *k^ is simply not found
> > *only* next to *e. It is found next to *o, as in
> > *k^o-, the demonstrative stem.
>
> Paradigmatic levelling, perhaps?
>

There's something wrong with a root of the type Co. Suppose those
demonstratives and relatives were originally eC, the Co form created
from separating enclitics?


Torsten