Re: Res: [tied] Etymology of Rome - h1rh1-em-/h1rh1-o:m-

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

>
> On 2007-03-14 12:46, alexandru_mg3 wrote:
>
> > So Piotr, I understand that now you agree with my ideea
> >
> > PIE dHg^H-o:m- > Latin *hu:m-(a:nus)?
> >
> > Initially you have said that such a derivation is not possible ...
>
> I actually said *dHg^H-o:m-h3n- > hu:ma:nus was impossible. It is.

I

> agree with Sean that the development of *o: > Lat. u: is possible

in

> monosyllables before a resonant (certainly *r, possibly *m). The
> <-a:nus> part can't go back to anything like *-h3n-. It's just a
> productive Latin suffix added to the 'earth' word in the immediate
> ancestor of Latin.
>
> Piotr

Ok, with -h3n- added later (even here I think that o:m->u:m- is a
little bit 'more general')

=> But the main point remain -o:m- for Latin hu:ma:nus.

Next for our topic (Rome) we have are still 'on-track' with -o:m-
versus -om-,-em- supposition having:

-o:m- versus short -om-/em- in Latin hu:ma:nus versus Latin humus

You told me that -o:m- shouldn't appear after *h1rh1- because we
need consonantic clusters: I sustain that it can appear (and I will
come back on this topic).

But maybe first 'to see' another Latin output than my supposed :
HRH/V > RV : we need an example here.

Marius

>