Reconstruction talk:Proto-Indo-European/pstḗn

What is the basis for the etymology given here? *pstḗn clearly doesn't end in, and I doubt the etymology given here, as it seems unlikely to me that two laryngeals would disappear without a trace. The source given for the etymology seems to be for a different word,, that does appear to correspond better. Dghmonwiskos (talk) 09:44, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Derivation from *ph₂ǵ-sth₂-
There is still no source for the given etymology.

Victar, you seem not to understand the reason for my edit. The source does mention, obviously, but only in the context of the derivation of Germanic. Crucially, it does not mention, thus it cannot be referred as a source for the hypothesis in question. Or are you claiming that, because is put forth in some reconstruction somewhere, you can keep the source merely to refer to its existence?

The solution is pretty straightforward; just replace it with a source that actually includes the hypothesis being referenced. — 69.120.69.252 19:23, 6 April 2020 (UTC)