Re: Latin -idus as from dH- too

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

>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
> <miguelc@> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 00:00:05 -0000, "alexandru_mg3"
> > <alexandru_mg3@> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >Talking about the spreading of dH(e)h1- compounds in PIE times:
> > >
> > >I think that Olsen theory regarding Latin -idus as sourced on
> > >-h-to- > t-h-o > etc...is finally a mistake
> >
> > What Olsen actually says is that -idus comes from *-eh1-tos
> > (> *-ethos > -idus), where *-eh1- is the stative suffix. For
> > instance cale:re "to be warm" => calidus.
> >
> > =======================
> > Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
> > miguelc@
>
> The point here is a phonetical one Miguel: if one assume a
> metathesis h-t > t-h => I don't see any specific reason to assume
> only -h1- and not h in general
> So barba:tus is a real issue for her and she is quite aware about
> this: she quite tries to cover the issue with a
> supposed 'restauration' in barba:tus
>
> Marius

Olsen derived Latin acerbus as *h2ek^-ri-h2-to => so you can be sure
now that she consider the metathesis h-t > t-h available for any h-
(to suppose in general h-t > t-h is for sure coherent)

However no other cognate testifies the presence of -h2 in relation
with *h2ek^-ri-

Also regarding the semantism I prefer *h2ek^-ri-dHh1-o-

Marius