Re: indo-european bears

"Widsith" <wwidsith@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1154077760.632728.197580@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

If the PIE word *h₂r̥tk̑os ‘bear’

I think you meant *h²r̥k̂tos

Gerard Koebler (Indogermanisches Wörterbuch) reports two Indoeuropean
roots:

*r̥k̂sos-? (*h²r̥k̂sos-?) and*r̥k̂tos-? (*h²r̥k̂tos-?).

According to the Oxford Latin Dictionary bear was ŕ̥kṣaḥ in Sanskrit .

(Greek άρκτος, Latin ursus) had survived
into Germanic and down to modern English, what would it have looked like?
On the face of it, you might guess a Germanic form *urþkaz --> English
‘orthk’.
That looks very wrong, but I can't work out which
phonological rule would prevent it.
If the -tk- metathesized to -kt- (which it did in Greek – but why
would it in Germanic exactly?), then you'd get a more plausible
Germanic *urxtaz, which might have given English *orght, or perhaps
*rought.
Any comments? I am not an expert so any comments on the sound changes
I might have misunderstood or forgotten about would be helpful.

I've collected a series of 'old bears' I hope it can satisfy curious people:

ðf-r (4), an., st. M. (a?): nhd. Bär (M.) (1), Wolf (M.) (1), Unfreundlicher
(Altnordisches Wörterbuch)
igul-tann-i, Æug-tann-i, an., sw. M. (n): nhd. Bär (M.) (1); L.: Vr 284a
(Altnordisches Wörterbuch)
bar-on, *ber-an? (Old French) (Neuenglisch-altniederfränkisches Wörterbuch)

but, unfortunately, I'm unable to reply to your question.

.