Re: Latin -u/o/i-lentus < *PIE - went-?

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, johnvertical@... wrote:

>
> > pYle_w-xY_-d.ó+
> > pYle_w-xY_-d.Hó+
> > pYlöw-i-d.Hó+m
> > plow-i-tHó+m
> > plow-ë-tHó+m
> > plow-tHó+m
> > plow-Tó+m
> > plow-fó+m
> > plow-vó+m
> > plow-bó+m
> > plom-bó+m
> > plumbum = lead L;
> >
> >
> > *
> > pYlöw-i-d.Há:x
> > pYlöw-y-d.Há:x
> > pYlöw-d.Hyá:x
> > pYlow-dHi-yá:
> > XWlow-dHi-yá:
> > luaide MI; luaidhe = lead I;
>
> Tangent: what's with the palatalization on *p?

Baltic changed r, > ur after K, r, > ir after KY or KW. The similar alt. after P raised the possibility of PIE PY and PW, which I examined and found ev. for.

>

Or the labiouvular in Celtic? AFAI'm aware, *p was lost there simply thru lenition (p > P > h > 0).


A common thought is that p > f > xW > h or sim.; it's more complicated than that but I just showed one stage. All IE changed KW > QW and K > Q by w/u (seen especially in alt. X > R and X > qH such as *naxú+ = boat; *naxw+ > *naXw+ > OIc nór; *naqHw+ > OIc no,kkve; OSx naco; etc.).

>
> Also, what do <ö>,

All IE changed e>ö by KW or P in the same syllable. This opt. > e/o (most of the ev. for this is seen as PIE apophony, but is unexplained and occurred only by KW or P, like L foedus).

>

the underbar


e_ = e+mid tone; e_w opt. > u_w (as *kYu_w-x-mó+s 'swelling' > G kúamos 'bean' (*pYlu_w-xY_-d.ó+ > L plumbum works just as well, but since L o/u alt. existed, I didn't bother making a choice).

>

and the plus sign mark?


The syllable boundary is shown by - and the morpheme boundary is shown by +.