Re: Mitanni and Matsya

On 2008-04-04 16:34, Piotr Gasiorowski wrote:

> One possible argument in favour of 'confine, protect' is that the roots
> *wer(h)-w- 'protect' and (h)welh-w- 'envelop' (the reconstruction is
> approximate and the index of the laryngeals a bit uncertain), conflated
> in Indo-Iranian, both display the *w-extension in different branches;

LIV has *wer- 'protect' (pres. *wer-u-) and *wel- (?*wel(h)-u-)
'confine' (plus a few other roos that may have merged in IIr.).

Piotr