Res: [tied] Re: Latin -idus as from dH- too

--- In cybalist@... s.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...> wrote:
>
> On 2008-03-13 02:55, alexandru_mg3 wrote:
>
> > Another 'hocus-pocus' at Olsen, this time with your eh1-to,
Miguel:
> >
> > 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 <
*h1rudH-
> > eh1-) : viewing this Olsen tries to derive it from *h1roudH-
etc...
> > but finally the related stative verb is only Latin rube:re
>
> What's your problem? PIE had both *h1rudH-ro- and *[h1]roudH-o- (as
in
> <ruber> vs. <ru:fus>, with a dialectal /f/). The predicted verbal
> adjectives from the corresponding statives are, respectively,
> *h1rudH-&1-tó - (thus or with analogical *-eh1-) and *roudH-e-h1- tó-
. If
> Latin has a suppletive "-e:re, -or, -idus" complex here, it's at
least
> easy to explain.
>
> Piotr

The predicted verbal adjectives are from some verbs isn't it?

The Latin stative verb that I know here is rube:re < *h1rudH-eh1-

So:
I) if you try to tell me: that Latin ru:bidus (with long u:) can be
derived from the verb rube:re < *h1rudH-eh1- adding a -to => this is
for sure false.

II) If not, you need to show me another Latin verb from where to
derive ru:bidus ....and not to show me some PIE o-grades in general
as possible formations.

Marius