Latin word formation

[petegray]

>> How about   de:mens?

> Doesn't really qualify, 'cause there's no -e/os suffix.

The original asker asked for any de: + nominal root forms.

>> You say debilis is de: + nominal root + suffix.   Could it be from a
>> different route?   de: + verbal root  + deverbative ending?

> Which verbal root then ?

Habeo has been suggested.   We know de+habeo > de:beo.  (Plautus still has
dehibeo).

My point was made because the original asker found de+ nominal root odd.  I
wanted to query why it had to be a nominal root in debilis.   That
assumption is made perhaps only because of the suggested links to Sanskrit
and Slavic.  But you are right, the next question is whether we have any
evidence for a verbal root that could give de-bil-is or de-bi-lis.

Peter