Reconstruction talk:Proto-Balto-Slavic/bérgas
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Reconstructable?[edit]
@Skiulinamo, Sławobóg, Kamen Ugalj: Considering the PS word is thought to potentially be a Germanic borrowing, seems a bit dubious (same goes for the PIE page). Discuss. Thadh (talk) 15:30, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Thadh, Sławobóg, Kamen Ugalj: The PIE noun and this entry should be deleted, seeing at the Slavic might be borrowed from Germanic. --Skiulinamo (talk) 05:12, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
- Majority of scholars believe it is native with -g- being irregular from ǵʰ. Sławobóg (talk) 13:57, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
- I don't know about the "majortity" but either way, doesn't mean we need to have a PBS or PIE entry if there is a doubt -- it can just live on *bʰerǵʰ-. --Skiulinamo (talk) 17:20, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
- I agree with removing PBS and PIE entries. I'm not fan of making PBS words with no Baltic descendants anyway. For list of linguists see ESUM. Sławobóg (talk) 19:30, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
- I don't know about the "majortity" but either way, doesn't mean we need to have a PBS or PIE entry if there is a doubt -- it can just live on *bʰerǵʰ-. --Skiulinamo (talk) 17:20, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
- Majority of scholars believe it is native with -g- being irregular from ǵʰ. Sławobóg (talk) 13:57, 2 February 2023 (UTC)