[tied] Re: *-tro-/*-tlo-

--- Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...> wrote:

> On 2007-06-20 21:32, stlatos wrote:
>
> > There are no certain cases of ln>:l. All def.
> ones show ln>ll in
> > all dialects (or ln if n is restored by analogy).
> The case of ou^los
> > 'curly' is from *wlxwos and shows R+tone X > oR/Ro
> before m/w and similar:
> >
> > *tl,xmn,+ > tólma
> >
> > *tr,xYmo+ > tórmos
> >
> > *pr,xWmo+ > prómos
>
> These have been analysed by Jens Rasmussen very
> elegantly.

That makes many more assumptions than I do. It is not necessary for
the Greek ev. to go back to PIE. The cognates such as Lith pìrmas
with prómos show RX could sometimes > oR/Ro. Since Greek shows the
most complicated changes in RX, diff. outcomes before (and between,
etc.) P and KW for R and RX seem reasonable.

Studying it further, there's no other possibility. There's also
sim. changes like *tr,kWno+ > tórnos and món(w)os but man(w)ós with
diff. tone showing in n>an or n>on between m_w.

> *wlh2wo- is ad hoc,

No, the full grade *wel-x-wo+ > vellum 'fleece' in Latin with the
same semantics as deriving it from

>*(h2)wol(h1)no- forms a
> pair with
> *h2wl.h1nah2,

> I find it hard to believe that cross-dialectal
> correspondences such as
> Ion./Att. opHeílo: ~ Aeol./Arc./Hom. opHéllo: ~ Dor.
> opHé:lo: point to
> anything else but a nasal present.

Greek *ly shows a diff. outcome than *ry or *ny in that it occurs as
ll in dia. in which _l would be expected. This seems like (one of the
many) variations caused by some words returning *y by analogy at some
point.

If there were any certain *ln in Greek, I'd go by that, but since
it's uncertain I don't have much to say on it.

> The dialectal
> distribution of sté:le:
> ~ stálla: ~ stá:la: is exactly parallel.

It's exactly the same as for *sl, too.

> > He doesn't allow Ktl>Ksl, so this *-slo- would
> really be PIE *-tlo-
> > in meaning. The rules for Greek include:
> >
> > t>th/x+syl_R
> > x-syl t > s/_l
> > x()-syl t > th/_R
>
> I find this *-slah2 more suspect than the
> traditional explanation. The
> view that <sté:le:> goes back to *stl.-nah2 is
> "widely held" for jolly
> good reasons.

But there's no certain example to prove it.

> > You said that *ah2t>ath but not *h2,t; I say
> Greek can be explained
> > only with full grade. Either way it seems needed.
>
> Not necessarily. The aspiration is older than the
> dissimilatory loss of
> the first *l. At the time it arose, the *h2 was
> non-syllbic. One could
> even propose *tl.h2-tlah2 > *tl.tHlah2 > *t&tHlah2,
> with a "schwa
> secundum". The Greek word simply doesn't belong
> here.

Where does it come from? It's obviously related other words from
*tlax+, and was seen as such over 100 years ago.

> > What part are you concerned about? Greek
> doesn't show tr>thr after
> > xY, (*ter-xY-trom > G téretron).
>
> It does in péletHron, for instance.

As I said:

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Sean Whalen <stlatos@...> wrote:
>
>
> --- Sean Whalen <stlatos@...> wrote:
>
> > --- Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...> wrote:
> > > 'auger' or Gk. péletHron < *kWélh1-trom.

> I'd derive it from *pYel-x-tro+ (as pelázo:
> 'approach') with short vowel assimilation.

since theres no *kWe>te or even *kW>k in dia.; assim. as in:

PIE *gWer-xW-tro+ 'throat' > Lith gerkle: Grk
*bérathrom > bérethron / bárathron 'pit'

*bérathrom > bérethron by short vowel assimilation
and
*bérathrom > bárathron by anticipatory (same).

0-grade *gWr,xW-tr(e)+ > *gWroxWtros > *gWrothros > *gWothros >
bothros 'pit, hole, hollow' with no KW dis. but r dis. (possible since
r wasn't between 2 vowels in this form).

> Analogical
> levellings betweel
> full-grade and nil-grade forms are the probable
> reason for the messy
> variation (which includes Lat. terebra).

No ana. of this type is needed if this is seen not to be a PIE rule.
There are sim. but dif. changes in several languages (some don't have
different t vs th so can't be evaluated).

> > And isn't bill "a particular kind"
> > of sword?
>
> Usually a broad one with two cutting edges and often
> a curved point, as
> in falchion, though in OE bill is often just a
> poetic synonym of
> <sweord>. *bHeid- means 'cut, cleave, bite', so the
> name is perfectly
> apt for the kind of weapon it refers to.

I don't dispute it because of its meaning, it was just a small joke
about your 'board' description.