Smoczyński's reconstruction of Proto-Balto-Slavic makes no distinction between *ś and *š, they are both *š to him, and he writes *ž accordingly. Since...
there is no more Proto-Baltic language. —CodeCat 21:28, 24 August 2015 (UTC) My idea was a hard redirect to Appendix:Proto-Balto-Slavic/akmō, where the...
*bʰel-, with the *-w- an extension which didn't seem to occur in Proto-Balto-Slavic. Jackwolfroven (talk) 03:01, 5 March 2014 (UTC) *bʰelw- doesn't satisfy...
probably not impartial. There's also Appendix:Proto-Baltic/akmens, redundant to Appendix:Proto-Balto-Slavic/akmō. —CodeCat 18:42, 15 February 2016 (UTC)...
(although the Latvian is borrowed from Slavic according to Derksen), so it could date even back to Balto-Slavic period? I don't know... All interpretations...
continuations of Balto-Slavic *put- (whence Latvian putns (“bird”) and Lithuanian putytis (“young bird”). And 'u' gave 'ъ' in Slavic, so **pъt is what...
I have seen Derksen and there is written: "Proto-Slavic form: azú". The "assimilation of final Balto-Slavic -ź before vociless consonants at the beginning...
Štambuk (talk) 16:19, 25 July 2013 (UTC) a and o merge in Balto-Slavic, so from the evidence of Slavic alone, *bʰogo- is equally valid. And there's nothing...
list other Balto-Slavic cognates (Lithuanian, Latvian and Common Slavic reconstruction - there are plenty of those inside Category:Proto-Slavic language...