--- Piotr Gasiorowski <
gpiotr@...> wrote:
> On 2006-08-22 23:53, Sean Whalen wrote:
>
> > The form xV&:N is analogical (as gen. *-ars >
> *-r.s
> > for r-stems), hu:ro: comes from the original.
>
> The two genitives go with two variants of the 'sun'
> word: the
> proterokinetic (and heteroclitic) neuter
> *sáh2-wl./*s(h2)wén-s and the
> secondarily animate *s(h2)wo:l/*sh2ul-os .
Iranian has rules that both change dentals to velars
and nasalize velars in non-nasal environments. There
is no reason to assume *n in the paradigm. The
details of nasalization also vary with language; there
was no late uniform Proto-Iranian. For example *(sw-
> xw > Nw > nw) in Pashto nwar < *swal- < *suxal.
There is, again, no reason to think the nom. ends in
a syl. C and evidence against it. The form *saxwèl is
perfectly suited to sauil and ana. *ha:wél-ios; also
*saxwèl > *saxwè:l met> *sa:wle: > saule:.
Since there are often optional forms when w and x
(H2) touch in PIE *(stew-x-ro-/stux-ro-/steux-ro- >
stex-ro- > stax-ro-) I ascribe to opt. syllabification
I say: *sa-xwèl and *sax-wèl > *sx.-wèl met> *sù-xel
with (opt?) xe>xa.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com