From: dgkilday57
Message: 68479
Date: 2012-02-03
>What I am saying is that PIE *h4 regularly aspirates preceding Skt. -t-, and produces Av. -T- unless -s- precedes the dental; Av. -st- corresponds to Skt. -sth- in that case. But Italic stops are not aspirated or fricativized by *h4.
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "dgkilday57" <dgkilday57@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "stlatos" <stlatos@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I don't think any additional complications are needed. It's already seen that tx > tHx was opt.:
> > >
> > > pathana- = broad Av; [e>a-a] patáne: = flat dish G;
> > >
> > > and tH > T > D > d in Latin.
> >
> > No; see <status>.
>
> Are you saying that had -tH- in PIE and tH>t not tH>T in Latin? If not you might be arguing against t>tH by x as I wrote above. If so, that would be ev. if the rules were reg., but they're not.
> Instead of repeating my many arguments in favor of that, I'll say: yes; see stabulum L; staflar- U; what part of "optional" don't you understand?Those Italic words reflect PIE *sth4-dHlo-, and no optional soundlaws are needed.