Re: Another pesky verbal -d-

If you will reframe the question, I will give it a shot.

Patrick

----- Original Message -----
From: "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 3:32 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] Another pesky verbal -d-



> Skan-dedi: ?
>
> Anybody want to comment?
>
> Torsten
> ==========
>
> Dear Comrade Torsten,
>
> The -s in wants in not s-mobile.
>
> BUT as regards skand-
> it's s- mobile.
>
> Cf. ghredh- "step"
> (-r- is infix)
> s-gh_-n-dh > *skand-
> (-n- is infix)
>
> Elementar.
>
> I'm ready for another one.
>
> Arnaud
>
> ==============

I was talking about the -do:, -dedi: alternation, not about any s-.
Anybody else have an explanation?


Torsten