From: Arnaud Fournet
Message: 61542
Date: 2008-11-11
----- Original Message -----
From: "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...>
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/53968
Burrows defends the IE-ness of Skt. vájra- by pointing out that -ro-
is a IE suffix. But -ro- is a thematized -r-, and -er is a Pre-Saami
suffix. I can't rule out that *wag-/*wak- with its /a/ was loaned into
PIE from some FU language.
======
Avoid buying more Absolut WäterChen VodKa.
-er in Pre-Saami is a proof that (one) Pre-Saami substrate is IE-an.
A.
==============
> > > *perh3-, *melh2- or *h2anh1-, with a final consonant cluster.
> >
> > I've grown suspicious of those roots with laryngeals in auslaut,
> > ghosts of departed quantities, most likely.
>
> Does such a ghost haunt *waskanã 'wash' as well?
Erh, what?
=======
Right
This example looks ugly.
A.
======
> Are the Skt. /i/ in <ániti> and Gk. /e/ in <ánemos> ghosts of a
> departed quantity?
Actually, that's exactly what I think h1 denotes. No one knows what
kind of phoneme it was, except that it causes compensatory
lengthening. But so many consonants cause compensatory lengthening
when they go. The cognates of *dheh1- in FU has a velar in auslaut,
maybe that's the obe that cause it in OIE?
========
Sorry,
I defer with your "no one knows",
I, myself, personally, as for myself, alone, personnellement, moi tout seul,
me-think H1 was either a pharyngeal voiceless fricative or a velar voiceless
fricative.
And i have reasons for that.
What is that dheH1 in FU ??
A.
========