Re: The ur-/ar- language

This resolves the puzzle of the *-k- suffix of Latin
etc *ped-k- (in
pecco: etc) and *man-k- (in mancus): they are pre-IE
words with pre-IE suffixes loaned by Venetic and then
loaned from Venetic by Latin,
Germanic (before and after Grimm), Celtic etc.

Thanx for sharing the article, I appreciate it.
Regarding *-k-, it does show up in Basque and Trask
elaborated on it on the old lists. He also
compared/contrasted it to IE *-k-. See the archives
because I've forgotten the details of what he said and
don't want to misquote him.
*-k- shows up in Iberian as well. See Anderson, and
many others.
*-k- shows up in Nostratic and isn't it one of the
arguments for its existence?
In IE, *-k- and *-sk- seem so ubiquitous as to be
native. If I-Ir, Anatolian and Tokharian have it, then
we can pretty say it's native to IE
So, Torsten, you've lost me here.

Note on Kuhn's use of the term 'The last
Indo-European' : it seems he
identifies Krahes Alteuropäiasch ewith the earliest
IE, perhaps with
PIE itself, which is of course wrong. If the Veneti
(new etymology:
from *wes-n- "merchant", later "beggar" (Pokorny), cf
the Dutch 'sea
beggars".

Note that the -k- suffix may occur also in the
non-Basque examples
from Basque Rick provided:
urki "birch",
abarka "bast sandals, originally bast".

I'm guessing urki and birch are related somehow, as
well as abarka and bark, also haunch and (h)anka.
There are more and I'm sure they're documented
somewhere in archives of this or some other list such
as the old IE or Nostratic-L