Re: [tied] tt/st/ss

On 2007-06-12 20:39, stlatos wrote:

> With your description now specifically allowing -lum and -ulum, do
> you still think or need to have tt>ss as an explanation of sca:lo+ and
> caelo+? What stage would you use to explain my *pangtlo+ > *pangslo+
> pa:la 'spade, shovel'? Which stage allows the Lachmann lengthening
> you posited before?

This is the oldest layer, i.e. the regular development of *-K-tlo-, in
which the *t was for some reason treated as in the "thorny" clusters
resulting from the metathesis of *-tk-. This treatment is old and not
restricted to Latin. More about that tomorrow.

Piotr