Re: IS PIE * DERU EXCLUSIVELY INDO-EUROPEAN ?

In my opinion, the changes you attribute to a possible *d-prefix are better
explained as the result of phonological processes.
==============
Tsalam? t?ob

You are right to start with "in my opinion".
Mine is different.
I m not talking about changes but morphology.
Arnaud
===============
Egyptian is a notable case where <n> corresponds to either /n/ or /l/ in
related languages.
============
The dialect that created the writing system : probably Fayyumic
had lost some contrasts.
but these phonemes reemerge in Coptic dialects.
Arnaud
=============
There are absolutely no infixes in PIE. The one reputed example is the
suffix -*nV, which, in certain cases, is metathesized to a position before
the final consonant of the root.
=============
Facts are stubborn, Hegel.
Arnaud
=============
For prefix status, I should have added that we be able to isolate the
meaning of the prefix: any ideas or what these purported prefixes mean?
=======
I have already stated that this prefix is medio-passive
and it is most often a useless pleonastic addition in PIE
Maybe I have already written ten times.
The blindest are those who don't want to see.
Arnaud
===========
A seeming prefix in almost unlimited use is s-mobile. In my opinion, it is
the first element of a _compound consisting_ of *s(u)-, 'well', and gives
the root an emphatic of perfective aspect. I hypothesize that this is the
probable meaning of *s(u) though, by its nature, it is devilishly difficult
to conclusively demonstrate.
Patrick
===========
There are probably more than one #s-

One is anaphoric *s-
Verb > noun

Another one is "intensifier"
Verb > Verb

Arnaud
=========================