--- Sean Whalen <
stlatos@...> wrote:
> If you don't believe in PIE *ul not *wl. then just
> assume *sxulyos was *sxu-lyos (or *sxu-los if you
> don't believe in that original form for the gen.)
> but
> adding adj. -na- forced a new syllabification
> creating
> new *ul.
I've looked for more examples of this that could
support my idea. So:
g^hulos '*crooked > bad' in OCS zUlU
g^hwl.ti > Lith paz^vilti 'to bow'
g^hulnos > paz^ulnus 'slanting, sloping'
So probably *g^hulos formed a new adj. in -no- but
the ul was kept the same even in the new
syllabification, just as I posited for sunna/*suln-.
Also, for *Lk>Luk (as miluks) OCS alUkati but Lith
alkti < *uLk- (or whatever form you prefer to rec.)
'be hungry' < '*lie ill'.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com