From: Rick McCallister
Message: 59150
Date: 2008-06-09
>You don't think "all" and "hand" are related in this
> I'd say *pemt+kWe and have no reason to think it
> meant 'hand'
> specifically, instead of 'all, whole, etc.'
>So, again, what's your original meaning for **twores-
> The specific number *kWe attached to isn't
> important, only the form
> of the sequence:
>
> *
> semps, dwo:v treyes kWe, twores pemt kWe
>
> 'one, two and three, four and five
>