> On 2008-03-13 02:55, alexandru_mg3 wrote:
> > Another 'hocus-pocus' at Olsen, this time with your eh1-to,
> > is the derivation of Latin ru:bidus because due to its long u: it
> > cannot be derived from *h1rudH-eh1-to- (see Latin rube:re <
> > eh1-) : viewing this Olsen tries to derive it from *h1roudH-etc...
> > but finally the related stative verb is only Latin rube:rein
> What's your problem? PIE had both *h1rudH-ro- and *[h1]roudH-o- (as
> <ruber> vs. <ru:fus>, with a dialectal /f/). The predicted verbal. If
> adjectives from the corresponding statives are, respectively,
> *h1rudH-&1-tó- (thus or with analogical *-eh1-) and *roudH-e-h1-tó-
> Latin has a suppletive "-e:re, -or, -idus" complex here, it's atleast
> easy to explain.The predicted verbal adjectives are from some verbs isn't it?