From: Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
Message: 54484
Date: 2008-03-02
>--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer VidalThat's unexpected from someone who so vehemently defended
><miguelc@...> wrote:
>> >Because *bHh- being impossible to be pronounced ->and because, in
>> >this particular case, we have also a y/w/r/l/m/n 'around' the
>> >metathesis took place immediately : *bHih-.
>> >
>> >So it's an impossible syllabification
>>
>> There still are a couple of forms with /i/ < *h2i instead of
>> /i:/ < *ih2. Baltic bijóti ~ bijât and Avestan biBiuua:h-
>> can be explained otherwise (*bhih2-ah2-, syllabified as
>> *bhi-h2ah2-, and defective spelling for biBi:uua:h- = Skt.
>> bibhi:va:n-), but Greek pithe:kos "monkey", if it belongs
>> here, looks like a genuine case of *bhh2idh- (which probably
>> was pronounced /bHidH/, with assimilation of /x/ into the
>> aspiration of /bh/).
>>
>>
>> =======================
>> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
>> miguelc@...
>
> Testis Unus Testis Nullus
>