From: stlatos
Message: 68546
Date: 2012-02-11
>I don't see any need for it to be old. It's prob. a new analogical word in Latin or late PIt.
>
>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@> wrote:
> >
> > W dniu 2012-02-08 19:19, stlatos pisze:
> >
> > > Gmc.
> > > *xaizda- = hair
> > > vs.
> > > *xaizda- = flax fiber / etc.
> > >
> > > Exactly the same meaning range, but *kays- differs from *kas- in having
> > > an entire phoneme added WITHIN the word, not just a possible k vs kY
> > > (considering all the apparently irregular changes among them in families
> > > that differentiate them).
> >
> > Except that the Gmc. word is actually *xazDa-/*xezDa(n)- in both
> > meanings (ON haddr 'long hair', OE pl. heordan 'hards of flax', etc.).
> > Cf. *xe:ra- 'hair', which in my opinion reflects *kes-ró-:
> >
> > http://hdl.handle.net/10593/1990
>
> According to Buck (OUG sec. 118), the change *sr > *fr (whence Latin fr-, -br- as in <fri:gus>, <fu:nebris>, etc.) "belongs doubtless to the Italic period". This makes it difficult to derive Lat. <vernus> from a protoform *wesri-no-. One would expect *wesrino- > Proto-Italic *wefrino- > Proto-Latin *webrino- > *webr.no- > *weberno- > Lat. *vebernus.
>
> I propose instead that Proto-Italic, like Proto-Slavic, had *wesni-no- 'springy' formed as a deadverbial adjective from the inherited loc. sg. *wesni 'in spring'.