From: gprosti
Message: 70489
Date: 2012-11-28
>If *okti < *Hrtkos requires the positing of a new sound law (*a > *o), along with at least two non-trivial changes specific to this word (metathesis and the deletion of *r), what compelling reason is there to think that *okti and *Hrtkos are related to begin with?
> On re-checking some of Koivulehto's writing he has actually suggested an initial phonetic develoment into an open labial vowel *o, *a > *å and that (some of) these loans would be later than this development & erlier than *å > *a. Which seems to require awfully close timing, but recalling another *o-loan yet: at least *okti "bear" from *h2rtk´os (exact loangiver not identified AFAIK) appears to require *o being derivable even from previous IE *a anyway; and must also be assigned to a layer distinct from the one with *H- > *k-.
>
>