From: Patrick Ryan
Message: 53708
Date: 2008-02-19
----- Original Message -----
From: "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 8:07 AM
Subject: [tied] Re: PIE -*C-presents
--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...> wrote:
>
> On 2008-02-19 13:33, Patrick Ryan wrote:
>
<snip>
Or could it be the other way round, that the dental 'extension' is
part of the original root, and the 'extension-less' side form the
result of false division of 3sg pres. in *-ti (with various
assimilations of the dental)?
Torsten
***
No, I do not think so.
I am a (fanatic) believer in the idea that PIE roots had only two
permissible forms:
*CV, and
*CVC(V).
Besides, does not Beekes show that the 3rd p. sing. was originally -*Ø?
Patrick