Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/wéh₁itis

Etymology
From.

The reconstruction of the underlying root is heavily debated. Beekes, De Vaan, and Derksen all reconstruct, each using the oblique, zero-grade stem as the etymon for the Hellenic, Italic, and Balto-Slavic branches respectively. Fortson agrees that the oblique, zero-grade stems of many nouns in and  were generalized in Indo-Aryan, Hellenic, and many other branches. Other examples include:
 * > → Old Armenian, Celtic  (Old Irish , Middle Welsh ), Germanic , Italic  (Latin ), Sanskrit
 * > → Celtic  (Brythonic ), Germanic, Iranian  (Avestan ), Italic

Matasović instead reconstructs, pointing out that, in Celtic, a laryngeal is lost after the diphthong -ey- and before a consonant (/eyHC/ → /eyC/) and also that -ey- regularly becomes -ē-. However, given the evidence of other Celtic nouns derived from  and  ( >,  > ,  > ), Celtic also appears to favor the zero-grade for these nouns, making the reconstruction  untenable. It is unclear whether regularly gives Celtic, but , the zero-grade of , certainly would not.

The LIV in turn reconstructs for the verbs meaning “to wrap, twine” (Latin, Sanskrit , Slavic ); though De Vaan rejects this proposal.

Noun

 * 1) that which twines or bends
 * 2)  branch, switch

Descendants
(From generalized zero-grade )

Unsorted formations:
 * Armenian:
 * Hawramî:
 * Kurdish:
 * Northern Kurdish:
 * Central Kurdish:
 * Southern Kurdish:
 * Ossetian:
 * Digor: ,
 * Iron:
 * Kurdish:
 * Northern Kurdish:
 * Central Kurdish:
 * Southern Kurdish:
 * Ossetian:
 * Digor: ,
 * Iron:
 * Ossetian:
 * Digor: ,
 * Iron: