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

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...> wrote:

>
> stlatos wrote:
>
> >>> G kná:o: 'I scrape'; MIr cnáim 'I chew/gnaw'
> >> In both Greek and Celtic *n.h2 > na:.
> >
> > But why would only the 0-grade remain in both?
>
> Because the present stem that survived in both branches happened to be
> based on the nil-grade.

> In this particular case, by the way, a connection with Skt. kHánati is
> possible but far from certain, based more on the similarity of the form
> than a fully satisfactory correspondence.

But though Skt generalized kh-, Av had k- and x- showing there was
analogy in Skt. When not next to the nasal there was k-, not kH- > x-
(ka,stra-).

Analogy of this type usually came from alt. like *gWe- > *gYe- > ja-
so j spread to forms that should have had g, etc. What change do you
think caused the spread in this case (if no kWn.- > kWH-)?