From: Piotr Gasiorowski Message: 60710 Date: 2008-10-09
On 2008-10-09 18:03, stlatos wrote:
> This was PIE *xauswo:s with dissim. of u-w > u-0 in most (not Greek
> *auswo:s > *a:uso:s).
You have the rather irritating habit of saying "it was PIE *X" when you
really mean "I believe it was PIE *X". As the reconstruction seems to be
a private idea of yours, you might at least justify it somehow. Why not
*h2auso:s > *auho:s > *a:wos, etc.?