Reconstruction talk:Proto-Indo-European/h₁widʰéwh₂

Can also Ossetian идæдз: be a cognate? we have a w-> vowel transition as in Greek and the d is well preserved. Bogorm 07:50, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Ossetian idæʒ is indeed a cognate. Initial /e/ in Greek is a result of laryngeal vocalization, not of */w/, and Ossetian initial */i/ here arose by monophthongisation of earlier */ui/. In Greek and Phrygian, word-initially and in "syllabic" position laryngeals were vocalized to /e/, /a/, /o/ (in that order, for */h₁/, */h₂/ and */h₃/, respectively). Elsewhere they've usually been completely lost without a trace. --Ivan Štambuk 09:50, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Would the Greek vocalize the laryngeal /h/ to /ē/ though? That seems a bit odd. Soap (talk) 20:42, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Latin
Does Latin come from  ? (or is it the other way around ? I don't think so) If so, I suppose *h₁widʰéwh₂ comes itself from a root or something, "to deprive". --Fsojic (talk) 14:32, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Persian بیوه (bive)
A cognate? I don't know much about Persian historic phonetics, but بیست (bist, "twenty") is from Middle Persian wîst, so the b- looks right...
 * P.S. I've found the word in a source now (Geiger, 1974: ''Grundriß der iranischen Philologie, vol. I, section 2, p. 34). It's a cognate, so I've added it to the list.

Reconstruction shape

 * What is the evidence for this reconstruction as opposed to, say, *h₁widʰéweh₂? I'm not near my sources at the moment, but looking at the reflexes, they all look like regular feminine thematics. Thoughts? — JohnC5 14:59, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't know, but it's what Ringe reconstructs. —CodeCat 15:51, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Weird. I'll look at this later. — JohnC5 16:43, 12 May 2016 (UTC)