Re[2]: [tied] Existence of PIE

At 6:12:00 PM on Monday, January 28, 2008, tgpedersen wrote:

> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Brian M. Scott"
> <BMScott@...> wrote:

>> At 1:40:07 PM on Monday, January 28, 2008, tgpedersen wrote:

>>> BTW veklu > vieux, so ve(s)p- > **vie(s)p-? Not so, so
>>> there must have been two v-sounds: v and w, in Western
>>> Romance.

>> Latin /w/ had already become /B/ by the time the Gmc. word
>> was borrowed; Gmc. /w-/ hardened to OFr /gw-/, while LLat.
>> /B/ > OFr /v/.

> You don't need the detour via /B/ if Germanic /w/ was
> borrowed directly.

What are you trying to say here? The evidence for
development of Lat. /w/ to LLat. /B/ is extremely clear, and
what I said about Gmc. /w-/ is that it *was* borrowed
directly -- as /gw-/.

Brian