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

After more study:

--- stlatos <stlatos@...> wrote:

> --- Jens Elmegård Rasmussen <elme@...> wrote:
>
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "stlatos"
> > <stlatos@...> wrote:
> > >
> > > So, by your order, this change happens after
> the
> > formation of
> > > syllabic C? That makes the whole thing much
> less
> > likely to be one
> > PIE
> > > change.
> >
> > I don't see that: the syllabification rules are
> > basically the same in
> > all the IE branches, so I see little reason to
> > separate them.
>
> I made come criticisms of this theory before, as:
>
> --- Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...> wrote:
>
> > On 2007-03-16 00:54, tgpedersen wrote:
> >
> > >> Then if Olsen is right (as I think she is)
> about
> > the "preaspirating"
> > >> effect of *h2 and *h1, they belong to the same
> > natural class
> > >> (presumably of fricatives, since *h2 was quite
> > clearly a fricative).
> > >
> > > Examples?
> >
> > *-tl/rom, *-tl/rah2 > *-tHl/rom, *-tHl/rah2 after
> > consonantal *h2 and
> > *h1, e.g. *páh2-tHlom > Lat. pa:bulum,
> *sjuh1-tHláh2
> > > Lat. su:bula, but
> > *póh3-tlom > Lat. po:culum. Then Lat. -idus <
> > *-etHo- < *-e-h1- + -to-,
> > Gk. ple^:tHos, ple:tHú:s, lat. ple:bs <
> > *pleh1-tH(u/w)-. Then cases like
> > Skt. ti:rtHa- 'passage', Lith. ti`ltas 'bridge' <
> > *tl.h2-tHo-.
>
> These are not from PIE but the result of similar
> changes in a few
> branches. Even Iranian and Indic aren't exactly the
> same. H3 (xW)
> can cause this, too (* pYròxW >> prathamá-).

There's no good ev. that H3 (xW) didn't cause aspiration in some IE
languages (in the same env. that H1 and H2 caused it).

If you assume PIE *poxWtlom > L po:culum with no complications it
seems fine. However, *gWiixWetos > *gWiivotos > G bíotos and weak
stem *gWixWt(e)+ > L vi:ta show that some forms didn't have contact
between the sounds.

*poxWetlos > *povotlos > *howodlos > OIr ól 'drink(ing)' shows this
word had the same ablaut as *gWiixWetos *gWixWt(e)+ (or else the vowel
would have been earlier oxW > o: > a:).

*syuxWtl(e)+ > *sYuxWthla:x > su:bula 'awl' shows aspiration. The
reconstruction with xW not x is due to several things, most
importantly *syouxWmos > *syoumos > seam with ouxW > ou at the end of
a syl. just like oixY > oi in optative -oit, etc.