Re: PIE *ºnbh-ro- 'cloud, mist'

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "stlatos" <stlatos@...> wrote:

>
> Looking at what are "generally" taken as cognates: L imber ; G �mbros 'rain(storm)' ; S abhr�- 'cloud' ; Gaul Ambris '(name > of river)' ; I see no -a- or any -V- between the nasal and bH or any ev. that the nasal is -n- not -m- (the G might even be ev. for > -m- (since m, > � ( > � in many), the exact details of C, > [] in G aren't fully understood, and there's some ev. for
> gemination in some env. (maybe �nnea)); but not clear enough). Why would PIE -a- disappear everywhere but Italic, and in > only one part of it (or -x- fail to voc., or whatever you might think). Your commitment to taking a view opposite mine no
> matter what the evidence is impressive. However, I think you should reexamine the ev. or at least tell me how they could be > cognate, or what the etymon was, etc.
>

In PIE *ºnbh-ro- 'cloud, mist ' the nasal is a "syllablic" ºn. The native Greek output of this root is aphrós 'foam', with ómbros being surely a Pelasgian loanword much in the same way than túmbos is to the native táphos.

Please don't assume every word within an IE language, even with a PIE etymology, has to be inherited.