Reconstruction talk:Proto-Indo-European/h₂elut-

Nominative?

As far as I can see, only Germanic gives direct evidence for the -t-, but in a rather strong way. In Germanic, like in Balto-Slavic, final -d and -t are lost, although in Germanic it's preserved in single-syllable words (which is the difference between English that and Slavic to). But Germanic preserves a rather unique irregular declension, with the lost -t resurfacing as -þ- in the oblique case forms, a situation which is still attested in Old English. This implies, though, that the nominative form must have ended in -t before final -t was lost. That, in turn, implies that this word was inherited as a neuter consonant stem, because neuter consonant stems in PIE are generally reconstructed without any ending in the nominative/accusative/vocative singular (compare *móri). So that would make this *h₂elut in the nominative. I think that PIE didn't distinguish voicing between d and t word-finally, so that it might also be *h₂elud. —CodeCat 22:02, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

I followed the references in reconstructing h₂elut-, but if you are confident in your original research, go ahead, move the entry. --Vahag (talk) 22:13, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

The stem ends in -t-, but the nominative should end in -d. Since there is no conjugation table, however, and only the stem is given, the issue is moot. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 19:38, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

The lack of the dental in Baltic and Slavic, by the way, is exactly an argument favouring the possibility of borrowing from Germanic. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 20:02, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Proto-Slavic *ľutъ

How about adding a reference to Proto-Slavic *ľutъ? I think that it could be possible, starting out with zero-grade in the beginning instead, from *h₂lewt-. The meaning of Serbo-Croatian ljut (or at least some of its usage) also aligns with ἀλύδοιμος. Ping User:Florian Blaschke - Anonimski (talk) 19:24, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Sounds a little far-fetched, honestly. Beer is bitter, not spicy. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 22:33, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Yes, "ljut", when referring to taste, normally means "spicy" (more precisely, chili-spicy and not herb-spicy), but it's semantically relatively close. The Slavic word for "bitter" is *gorьkъ, which could be from *gʷʰer- (as *gʷʰor-). The page *gorьkъ mentions *goře but doesn't go further up the chain, so look at the verb meaning "burn", *gorěti. Notice how the bitter taste can be associated with "burn" in Slavic, while the spicy taste can be described as "burning hot" in English. Anyway I think that *ľutъ could be added here, at least noted with "possibly". If the word didn't have any taste-related meaning, then of course it would be better to omit it, but there are arguments to note a possible connection. Anonimski (talk) 17:55, 9 October 2023 (UTC)