Reconstruction talk:Proto-West Germanic/lauwu

RFD discussion: February 2020–August 2023

The following information passed a request for deletion (permalink).

This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.

---

Reconstruction:Proto-West Germanic/lauwu

Gothic: [Term?] (“lēw”), Gothic: [Term?] (“lēwjan”), Old English: lǣwan, Old High German: gi-lāwen, Ukrainian: лïви́ти (lïvýty), Czech: leviti.

• Apparently: *leh₂w-/*lh̥₂u- and *leh₁w-/*lh̥₁u-, and *lawh₁-/*luh₁-. ---- Gnosandes (talk) 01:30, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

It might help if you explained why you're throwing all these redlinks at us that aren't mentioned in the entry. The Old English reflexes in the entry look like they're from Old English lǣwan, but you would have been better off linking to Proto-West Germanic *lāwijan and its parent Proto-Germanic *lēwijaną than dumping a random-looking heap of their descendants in front of us. Chuck Entz (talk) 02:07, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

@Chuck Entz, Thanks to these examples, you provided help. However, the reconstruction of Proto-West Germanic *lauwu is unconvincing; I suggest removing this reconstruction. It is likely that the Proto-Germanic *lēwijaną and Proto-Germanic *lēwą dates back to the Proto-Indo-European *leh₁w-. The Old English lǣwan probably dates back to the Proto-West Germanic *lāwijan.

Unconvincing reconstruction of Proto-Indo-European *leh₁wéh₂; it must be changed to Proto-Indo-European *leh₂wéh₂ < *leh₂w- (watch the discussion above). The Proto-Balto-Slavic *lā́ˀwāˀ (with Hirt's law), as well as the Proto-Germanic *lawwō (with Holtzmann's law and Dybo's law), date back to the Proto-Indo-European *leh₂wéh₂. At the same time, it is a big mistake to associate the Proto-Germanic *lawwō with Proto-Indo-European *lewH- (“to cut”), with incorrectly specified semantics by the user @Holodwig21 (how to output this?). But Proto-Indo-European *lewH- (“louse”) ≠ Proto-Indo-European *lawh₁- (“to cut, to slice”)? Emphasis paradigms should be taken into account. And do not unite the roots, as is customary.

*leh₁w- (a revision of the semantics) (to let (go)?)	*leh₂w- (berth?, bed?)
*lawh₁- (to cut off; to cut, to slice)	*lewH- (louse)

Gnosandes (talk) 15:11, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Your PIE *leh₁wéh₂ should be deleted. At best, any connection between the two words is only worth mentioning in an etymology. Otherwise, PWG *lauwu is just fine. --{{victar|talk}} 03:59, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

• Kept. —Mahāgaja · talk 14:11, 21 August 2023 (UTC)