From: Piotr Gasiorowski
> I know that we have a short u against a long one however the meaningForget it. Skt. dur- in the forms you quoted is just a sandhi
> is almost identical (and maibe we have a laryngeal in the root to
> *duhr- ~ *dhur-
> b. Regarding: "<le:x>" is a root noun from *leg^- 'collect, gather' "Levelled-out length in a root noun is hardly unusual, especially given
> How we can explain the long e: in le:x in this case ? As I know PIE
> *leg^- has a short *e (or I skip something here?)
> Viewing this, is not better to link Latin le:x to the same group asThe development of *ei > *e.: > e: is restricted to some special
> Latin liga:re < PIE lig^- < PIE Root *leig^- 'to tie' ?
> PIE *ei > OldLatin ei > Old Latin e: > Latin i:
> But Old Latin e: remained *e: in le:vis and became a short *e (from
> a previous long one) in Latin deus < *deiwos so at least we could
> imagine 'another more or less similar' case for le:x
> deus. The mid-high vowel *e.: was also lowered between a liquid and aretained *w (as in <le:vis>, or <le:vi:>, the perf. of lino:, p.p.