Re: IS PIE * DERU EXCLUSIVELY INDO-EUROPEAN ?

Postulating a *d prefix solves all of these problems in one fell
swoop. This prefix wins by Occam's Razor.
=========
Tsalam? t?ob

I Agree !
(unsurprisingly)

=============
I'm willing to hazard a guess though. I suggest that these prefixes
are all remnants of noun classes (verbs would agree in class with
their head noun). That's very speculative, I admit. However, if I can
stray into the world of Nostraticism for a moment I would point to the
PAA affix *t which indicates feminine gender. PAA *t normally
coincides with PIE *(a)t and PAA *t' with PIE *d, however, according
to Bomhard in PAA affixes lose their ejective feature.
==========
I definitely doubt that the ejective feature could be lost in PAA.
Ad-hoc and running against the general framework of PAA phonology.
Arnaud
================
I'm tempted,
therefore, to propose a Nostratic *t' noun class marker (it needn't
necessarily indicate feminine gender). I'm really only at the
beginning stages of my research in this area, but if I'm right there
should be evidence for this noun class system in other Nostratic
languages. However, that's a discussion best left for Nostratic
oriented groups.
===============
It needn't start with Nostratic.
Internal data in PIE can be studied.

For example :
H2_w "cattle" :
aur- "adult male" = bull
t-aur- "young male" = Cf. Greek

kwi "eagle"
a-qui-la "eagle"
Greek i-ktînos "kite" < *"small eagle"

This prefix -t- of "smallness" is another hole in PIE theory.

We can patch the holes before working on Nostratic or whatever

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