From: stlatos
Message: 66335
Date: 2010-07-16
>Also, since the timing places V_ > V: before the creation of e: (2) and some might come < e:i, long diph. probably still existed. I'm not sure what a:u > ?, or if a:u > o:u before long diph.-loss. Not especially important to me, since I don't think *ausra- > *aura-.
> That's the usual explanation, but as Germanic has no unextended reflexes
> of the 'dawn' root, deriving both *austra- and *aura- (rather than
> *auza-) from *ausra- is more economic, since there is independent
> evidence for the loss of *z in *zr. Anyway, *h2ausro- means 'morning' in
> other branches, so I don't have to insist on 'east-wanderer'. It can be
> 'morning-wanderer' just as well.
>
> > The -t- in 'eastern' may not come from -s.r.- at all since it is a
> > derivative of 'morning', a word ending in -wó:s with f/t* (dental) alt.
> > (which words I believe you said probably came from T > s/t in PIE, with
> > no f, etc., mentioned). The -t- is also found in some l. in which there
> > is reason to think no sr>str took place, like Sl * utro.
>
> There are very good reasons to think Slavic <(j)utro> comes from
> *h2ausro- as well. First, Baltic has it (Lith. aus^ra, Latv. austra);
> secondly, Slavic has many traces of the by-form *(j)ustro.
>
> Piotr
>
--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "stlatos" <stlatos@...> wrote:
> It doesn't matter, since all the ev. for Vsr > V:r shows changes that were opt. in early IE, and I have detected many times; these include s. > r. and V1C1C1 > V1V1C1. Even the sr / str and sr / rs doesn't matter, since opt. T.T. > T. and opt. s. > r. in any environment. This is early and unrelated to s > z since they show e() > e: > E: > æ:, while ez > e: (or e:1 vs e:2).
>
r.s. certain:
we_ds.wó+ \ wu_ds.wó+ < we_dn.wó+ < +w(ó) = moving water
we_r.s.wó+
we_r.s.ó+ dis
we_r.r.ó+
we_er.ó+
wæ:ra-
kYe_r.s.ó+ = hair standing up / horripilation / bristle
kYe_r.s.ó+
kYe_r.r.ó+
kYee.r.ó+
xæ:ra-
kYe_r.s.yó+ < +y
r.s. uncertain:
(this category is for both words w met., which causes uncertainty, even though the order of the C's remains; and for r.t. (in the unlikely event I'm wrong about the particulars of the changes, or if < -rtr- not -rtl-))
mo_r.is.t.xó+ < mo_r.í+stxó+ = standing water/marsh/swamp
mo_r.is.t.xó+
mo_r.s.t.ixó+
mo_r.s.ixó+
mo_r.r.ixó+
mo_or.ixó+
mo_or.ixó+ mo_or.ëxó+
mo_or.iyó+ mo_or.ó+
mo:ri(ya)- mo:ra-
bHe_r.xYètló+s bHe_r.-xY-t.l+[] >mix> bHe_r.-xY-t.ló+
bHe_r.-t.ló+
bHe_r.-s.ló+
bHe_r.-r.ló+
bHe_r.-r.ó+
bHe_er.-ó+
bæ:ra-
fkYèr.t.ló+
fkYèr.-s.ló+
fkYèr.-r.ló+
fkYèr.-r.ó+
fkYèer.-ó+
skæ:ra-
s.r. certain:
gYHd.e_s.-i-n.ó+
gYHd.ye_s.-n.ó+
gYHi-ye_s.-r.ó+
gYHi-ye_r.-r.ó+ gYHe_r.-r.ó+
*ausra-
*ausra- *auzra-
*ausra- *aura-
*austra- *aura- (rather than *auza-)
(this is in this category for the certainty of the order of s-r, even though I don't believe the two you mention are dir. cognates, etc. (I have f/t* before the r., making this completely irrelevant))
uncertain:
we_r.wón.+ \ wr._wón.+ < +n. (dim) = wether
wr._wón.+
wr._xWón.+
wr._s.Wón.+
wr._s.wón.+ dis
wr._s.ón.+
u_r.s.ón.+
u_r.s.ón.+ u_r.s.ór.+
u_r.s.ón.+ u_r.s.ó+ dis
?
(this is in this category since cognates show both; possibly the result of opt. n.>r.)
I don't know if you have more ev. for your view since you only mentioned two examples of supposed zr vs. str.