Re: PIE meaning of the Germanic dental preterit

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...> wrote:

>
> On 2008-03-03 23:35, Sergejus Tarasovas wrote:
>
> > But why a formation with *-dHh1- is excluded? Not a dH-present

per se,

> > but a composition of a verbal root (stem) with the zero grade of

*dHeh1?

>
> I don't exclude it. I'm just trying to make sense of it. I actually
> suspect that *dHeh1- underlies many a *-dH- "extension" (and I have

said

> so many times on the list), but I can't say I understand those
> formations, so I'm probing alternative possibilities.
>
> Piotr

But Piotr, till yesterday, you have put on the table only the
dubious verb k^red-dHeh1- ...that can really be a real denominal verb

baidyti-case was raised by me, if I remember well.

And you refuted any possibility to link the Germanic dental-
preterite with the PIE dHeh1- verbal-formations?

Did you change your mind?

Marius