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

From: stlatos
Message: 49317
Date: 2007-07-05

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...> wrote:
>
> On 2007-07-04 01:18, stlatos wrote:
>
> > There are several odd changes involving i/y by KY. Some are
> > optional within each like:

> > *LoigYheye+ > *laigYyi+ > *laigYi+ / *lagYyi+ > Goth bilaigo:n; OHG
> > lecco:n
>
> These are different formations: caus./iter. *loig^H-éje/o- vs.

Where does the -o:- come from? Why j>0? Looking at my notes again
this may be even more complicated than I thought, including mixing
among forms and analogy which could complicate the ev.

> > *leukY+ > *leuxY+ > *leixY+ > OE li:h-

> Apart from the fact that the PIE root had *k rather than *k^

I'm sure it's from kY. The palatalized velars could split into i+k
or k+s. or combinations in IE branches as I've said before. Among
others, in Indo-Iranian kY>k between u and front V (so rus'ant- but
rocis-). This is part of early changes after u varying among the
branches.

Standard reconstructions showing *s added in PIE don't make sense;
why after specific sounds in different languages?, why KY not K?
Saying PIE had *leuk+s+mn, doesn't explain why *s would be inserted in
this word and so many others or why it doesn't appear in Goth lauhmuni.