Re: [tied] tt/st/ss

On 2007-06-18 19:13, stlatos wrote:

> Also, less easily seen is Germanic VRtl > VRsl:
>
> gYheltlos . kaltlos . bhertlos . fkYertlos
> etc
> gYheltlos . kaltlos . bhertlos . skertlos
> gYheltos .. kaltlos . bhertlos . skertlos
> gYheltos .. kalslos . bherslos . skerslos
> gYheltos .. kalsos .. bherslos . skerslos
> etc
> gYelþaz ... xalsaz .. berslaz .. skerslaz
> gYelþaz ... xalsaz .. berlaz ... skerlaz
> gYelþaz ... xalsaz .. be:raz ... ske:raz
> gYilþaz ... xalsaz .. be:raz ... ske:raz
> gYilþaz ... xalsaz .. bæ:raz ... skæ:raz
>
>
> *gYheltlos gYhl,tl(e)+ > Lith z^irkle:s 'shears'; Goth gilþa 'sickle'
>
> *kaltlos kl,tl(e)+ 'pole used to raise something > neck' > Lith
> kaklas; *xalsa+ > Goth hals
>
> *bhertlos > L ferculum; *be:ro+ > bier
>
> *fkYertlos > *kartalo+ > Skt kartari:-; *ske:ro+ > ON skæ:ri; OE
> sce:ara > shears

Aren't you packing too much explanatory power into the suffix *-tlo-?
How can an ad hoc scenario like *-ersl- > *-erl- > *-e:r- demonstrate
the existence of a *s at any stage in Germanic? *ske:ro: and *be:ro: may
easily reflect something else, e.g. collectives (or, better still as far
as semantics is concerned, fossilised duals) of root nouns, with the
length generalised from the nom.sg.

Piotr