Re: [tied] Re: Ie. *laywos/leh2iwos (was: ka and k^a)

On Sub, rujan 24, 2005 9:56 pm, Sergejus Tarasovas reče:

> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Mate Kapović <mkapovic@...> wrote:
>
>> > Less realistic than *laiwos, given the circumflex intonation,
> which
>> > indicates a laryngeal-less root. Derksen posits *lh2aiwo-. Brave
> boys,
>> > laryngealising to the last ;-).
>>
>> Circumflex intonation where? The word itself is not attested in
> Baltic and
>> the Slavic circumflex is irrelevant since we would expect it there
> anyway
>> (Greek laiós - acute would disappeare via Meillet's Law in Slavic
> the word
>> being mobile).
>
> But what about Hirt's law? Wouldn't Slavic a.p. c point to the
> absence of a laryngeal at least on the flanks of *i? That's probably
> why Derksen posits *lh2aiwo-: it would nicely account both for the
> Lithuanian acute (if one subscribes to Kortland's view that (C)HV
> yields acute in Baltic and Slavic) and the Slavic a.p. c.

But would Hirt's law occur in *leh2iwós?

Mate