--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "stlatos" <stlatos@...> wrote:
>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "stlatos" <stlatos@> wrote:
>
> > > I've already given a few examples that show this is not a complete
> > > explanation (at least).
> > <ferculum> need not be old. The unsyncopated form <fericulum> also
> > exists. Compare new <vehiculum> vs. older <ve:lum>
Also:
*vertetlos *verttl(e)+ 'spindle, etc.' > OHG wirtel; *werdeTlo+ > OIr
fertas (Tl>sl, r-l dis.); *werTedlo+ > OBr guirtilon; W gwerthyd (r-l
dis.); *wert_l(e)+ > Skt vartula:-.
There's *tlo- even after r; it helps show *C-etlo- and *-eCtlo- as
*C-eto- and *-eCto- are similar and so related.
About Olsen's PIE theory:
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(Y) 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.