Re: [tied] Slavic *sUto -> is NOT INHERIT

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Sean Whalen <stlatos@...> wrote:

>
> --- Miguel Carrasquer Vidal <miguelc@...> wrote:
>
>> The question is rather why the preverb / preposition
>> (which is _always_ sU- before a consonant, no matter what's
>> in the next syllable, and sUn- before a vowel)
>
> To me *xnY,gYh+ > sUvENzati looks like *suw- before
> a vowel.

There seems to be some line noise before sUvENzati. To me it looks
like the verb veNzati, with preverb sU-.

>> differs from the reflex soN- in compound nouns such as soNsêdU
>> "neighbour". The answer is that where the prefix is separable,
>> when it is used as a preverb or preposition, *k^om and *som
>
> I see no need for a form like *k^om;

But the facts indicate otherwise.

> If so why would it ever appear as sUn-?

Because *s'om > *suN V- > sU nV-

>> In fixed compounds, *k^om-/*som- develop as in the Inlaut,
>> giving soN-.
>
> Positing a form like *som- just to explain Slavic

Besides Slavic soN-, sU(n)-, there is also Latin cum, con-; OIr. con,
Gaul. com-; Germanic ga-, ham-(*k^om-) and Skt. sam-, Av. ha(m)-;
Lith. sam-, saN-.

> I think you deserve an explanation for some of my
> odd speculations since I haven't given all my evidence
> for every rule yet. However, since some of your
> recent responses have seemed too hostile or insulting
> to me I will no longer respond to your messages.

So you said last time.