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

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

> On 2007-06-21 21:58, stlatos wrote:
>
> >>> * xY,s+tlo+ > esthlos '~good'
> >> I don't think it contains *-tlo-.
> >
> > What's your derivation?
>
> I haven't got one I could die for, but <estHlos>,
> untypically of *-tlo-
> words, is an adjective. Perhaps derived from the
> root of IIr. *azdH- (<
> *h1ezdH-) 'prosper, increase, grow strong' (Skt.
> edHate).

Well, *-lo- doesn't often form adj., either. However, doesn't Greek
páskho: < *kWn,dhskYox prove that aspiration can move over an *s?

> >>> * xr,+tro+ > arthron 'joint'
> >> If it's the root found in the 'arm' word, it was
> *h2arh1-, conceivably
> >> yielding *h2r.h1-trom > *h2r.tHrom > artHron.
> >
> > Why h1?
>
> You're right. The evidence is insufficient to
> determine the colour of
> the second laryngeal. Cowgill reconstructs *h1, but
> that's because his
> collection of cognates is far too inclusive. _If_
> <artHron> is related
> to *h2(a)rh-mo-, Olsen's theory predicts that the
> laryneal can't be *h3,
> as in the 'plough' root, but permits either of the
> other two (PIE
> root-structure constraints don't exclude identical
> laryngeals).

It seems to me that bothros shows oh3tr > otHr, but maybe you have a
different derivation.