From: alexandru_mg3
Message: 52857
Date: 2008-02-12
>the
> On 2008-02-12 20:17, alexandru_mg3 wrote:
>
> > Not true: In Skt. vájra- < *weh2g^-ro- 'thunderbolt' => we have
> > loss of laryngeals before mediae in Indo-Iranian (see Lubotsky 81)is the
> > => see also Skt. pajrá
>
> Lubotsky's explanation is ad hoc. It doesn't account for cases like
> *gHla:dH-/*gHladH-; it doesn't explain the absence of *wo:g^- <
> *woh2g^-; it proposes paradigms that simply don't work. E.g., how
> weak stem of the 'nose' word, *nh2s-, supposed to produce Slavic*nos-
> or Ved. nas-, especially if (pace Kortlandt) the word has aninitial
> laryngeal, and so the nasal is _not_ initial? But even if it were,the
> vocalisation of *h2, according to Lubotsky's own rules, took placein
> Germanic, Italic, Celtic and Greek, not in Slavic or Indic. See alsodogmatic
>
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/47994
>
> Cases like *k^aso- have been discussed here as well:
>
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/40898
>
> In general, few Indo-Europeists would subscribe to Lubotsky's
> rejection of *a(:).Piotr, let's take the situations one by one not all in one.
>
> Piotr