Re: [tied] *kW- "?"

> > 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?
>
> Well, in most (if not all) satem languages, *kWos 'what (kind)' and
> *kos 'that (one)' would have fallen together into *kos ~ *kas (cf.
> Vedic _kas_ 'what (kind)').

If *kWos and *kos fall together in satem languages, how do we know
it's plain *k in *kos?


Torsten