Re: PIE meaning of the Germanic dental preterit

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "mcarrasquer" <miguelc@...> wrote:

>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alexandru_mg3" <alexandru_mg3@>
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alexandru_mg3" <alexandru_mg3@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alexandru_mg3"

<alexandru_mg3@>

> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Regarding the unexpected circumflex in Lith. <baidýti>
> > > >
> > > > "This accounts for the peculiar loss of laryngeals in

compounds

> > and o-
> > > > grade formations, where the final laryngeal was lost before

the

> > > initial
> > > > consonant of the second component
> > > > (cf. Hirt 1921: 185-187)."
> > > >
> > > > Marius
> > >
> > > After the loss of laryngeal is explained there is no argument

to

> > doubt
> > > it's verbal formation.
> > >
> > > Miguel?
> > >
> > > Marius
> >
> >
> > Miguel, with the argumentation regarding why the laryngeal was

lost

> > in *bHoih-dHh1- (-> as a final-laryngeal in the first member of a
> > compound), can we close here the story of 'denomination' in

baidyti?

>

------------------------------------------------------------------
I.

> I haven't seen any arguments why the laryngeal was lost in *bhoih2-

dh

> (h1)-.

Miguel, how is possible not to be aware abou the lost of laryngeal in
compounds ?



------------------------------------------------------------------
The fact is that the laryngeal was _not_ lost in either

> Latvian or Lithuanian (báime: < *bhoih2-dh-men-).

báime: IS DIRECTLY *bHoih2-m- (sic!) => no compound, laryngeal =>
righ accent position in Lithuanian.

'My friend' Derksen 'thinks similar':
"Proto-Indo-European reconstruction: bhoiH-m-"


-------------------------------------------------------------------
III.

> I suppose the Kortlandt quote above has to do with Saussure's law,
> which explains the loss of laryngeals in certain cases at the PIE
> level, so it doesn't apply at the Lithuanian level.

'Certain cases' (quite vague...I would say)

'PIE Level' and 'Lithuanian level'

A new thoeery: 'The theory of levels?'
Who told you that we are allowed to make references only to
the 'Lithuanian Level'

I quoted Derksen not Kortlandt.

In conclusion Miguel, not quite a strong argumentation on you side
this time.

Best Regards,
Marius