Re: Res: [tied] Etymology of Rome - h1romh-eh2 again

From: Richard Wordingham
Message: 47774
Date: 2007-03-10

--- In, "alexandru_mg3" <alexandru_mg3@...>

> I think Richard that you didn't read & understand completely my
> posted pdf...
> This clearly result on you above comment.

What are you objecting to? The claimed change is romhV > ro:mV and
what may have preceded the /r/ is irrelevant. Modern English does
have VC.V syllabification, though the author of the PDF seems to be
unaware of this. I think it's actually more likely that he ignored it
as an inconvenient linguisitically atypical fact.