Reconstruction talk:Proto-Slavic/śěpati

@KamiruPL: Hello, if the considered etymology from *ksweyp-, proposed by Pederson is correct, then this entry should be listed as Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/śěpati instead (with *ś < *x- before an ealier *-ai-). At least that is what the convension has been so far, cf. *śědъ, *śěrъ. I see that Polish clearly indicates proto-Slavic *s-, but this may be due to levelling? Are you familiar if there are other cases, where the second palatalization of pSl. *x yields Polish s (e.g. in the pl. of words finishing in -ch)? Безименен (talk) 10:45, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for your insightful remarks. Parallels to such levelling can definitely be found in the pl. of words ending in -ch . eg. Włoch/Włosi < *volxъ/*volśi. The reconstructed form can therefore be safely assumed to be *śěpati. I shall proceed to move the entry. KamiruPL (talk) 18:40, 6 June 2022 (UTC)