Reconstruction talk:Proto-Slavic/vymę

Is this 🇨🇬 correct? Shouldn't it be ? --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 21:00, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
 * it should be, see WT:AORV.—Игорь Тълкачь (talk) 17:34, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Etymological explanation
Can anyone explain how one gets from *h₁ówHdʰr̥ to vymę? How are they even cognates? BirdValiant (talk) 03:08, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
 * The Slavic suffix (also ) is built upon the Early Proto-Indo-European suffixes  and . In the earlier stages of PIE, nouns were split into strong /nom., acc. ~ ergative-absolutive-patient cases + vocative form/ and weak cases /all other cases/, which were apparently distinguished either via ablaut pattern in the declension or/and by shift in the ending best illustrated by the r/n-declension . Over time, each language gave priority to one of the two endings - e.g. in 🇨🇬 that was the strong ending -r, while in Slavic  it was the weak one -n (whence 🇨🇬).
 * In the particular case of, the proto-form was likely with regular reduction of *-dm- > *-m-. Compare for instance  < *pledmę or  < *vertmę. 90.196.185.60 13:19, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Wouldn't it be a good idea to list somewhere? Who reconstructed those versions? Where does the /m/ come from? BirdValiant (talk) 16:28, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
 * You have to ask admins or the author of the etymology regarding this issue. A direct descent of 🇨🇬 from is indeed impossible, however, on the other hand, linguists don't reconstruct PIE forms based on data from a single branch. Thus, reconstructing *h₁ówHdʰmr̥ at the level of PIE would be a little over the board. Probably overwriting  as *h₁ówHdʰmr̥ like I did here (and still linking to *h₁ówHdʰr̥) is some compromise solution. I can't tell - I'm not so familiar with Wiktionary standards... 90.196.185.60 20:59, 5 March 2020 (UTC)