Greek *uh2 (was: -tlo- vs -tro-)

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

> >> Thus, for example, *dHOuh2-m(n)-ó- > *dHu:(h2)mó- >
> >> fu:mus, dHu:má-,
> >> dymU etc. In this way I can account for the absence
> >> of expected
> >> laryngeal breaking in Greek (which would have given
> >> pre-Gk. **tHwa:mos
> >> if the PIE input had been simply *dHuh2-mó-).

> On 2007-07-08 00:26, stlatos wrote:

> > In Greek *ux > *wax only happens at morpheme boundaries; the x had
> > already disappeared after u elsewhere.

> The laryngeal breaking of *i and *u before *h2/3 (in Greek, Tocharian
> and Armenian) applies both inside morphemes and at morpheme boundaries.
> Cf. gWih3wó- > Gk. zo:ós (but Lat. vi:vus, OCS z^ivU, Skt. ji:vá-),
> *duh2-ró- > Gk. de:rós, Arm. erkar (but Lat. du:rus, Skt. du:rá-).

I only said Greek *uh2 (ux) for a reason, and with:

*bhux+ 'be(come)'
*bhux+Lo+ 'tribe' > G phu:lé:
*bhux+mn+ > G phu:^ma 'growth'

*krux+ 'rough, hard'
*krux+so+ 'crust' > G krúos 'frost', OE hru:se 'ground'

*kYwax+ 'swell' > G pa:-
*kYux+mn+ 'swelling' > ku:^ma 'wave'

*dhux+ 'shake'
*dhux+mo+ > G thu:mós '~spirit'


it seems fairly certain to me that ux>wax only at a _recognized_
morpheme boundary; the words have changed their meaning from the
original enough to be seen as whole words. The first stage in my
theory involves ux $ > uxW $ so at recognized boundaries x could be
restored easily (or never occur to begin with).