Re: [tied] *rebh- or *H3rebh-

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...>
wrote:

>
> On 2006-07-04 00:19, Abdullah Konushevci wrote:
>
> > Really, but *bh > Greek ph: *bhH-n-yo > phainein 'to shine',

Alb. <bënj>

> > 'to do, to bring to light'; *bha-k'o > Greek phagos 'lentil',

Alb.

> > <bathë> 'broad bean'; *bher- > Greek pherein, Alb. bie, Lat.

ferre.

>
> What do you take me for, Abdullah? :) *bH does give /pH/ in this

root,

> cf. the derivatives I quoted, such as <óropHos>. However, in the

present

> tense of the verb 'to cover' (*h1rebH-je/o-) the *bH was followed

by *j.

> The pre-Greek sequence *-pHj- developed regularly into /-pt-/ (via

a

> cluster with a prehistoric affricate), merging with the reflex of

*-pj-.

> As an independent illustration, consider <tápHos> 'grave' vs.

<tHapto:>

> 'bury'. Both these words derive from preforms with *dH..bH- >

*tHapH-.

> In the former, Grassmann's Law applies; in the latter (another *-

je/o-

> present stem) it doesn't, since the aspiration of the second stop
> disappeared in the process of palatalisation, which was earlier

than

> Grassmann's Law in Greek.
>
> Piotr

From what I know, se my previous message, we have'nt here to deal at
all with ha-ha rule.

Konushevci