"centum"/"satem" "exceptions" [was Re: Northwest IE attributes]

[roslyn frank]

At 08:11 PM 2/1/00 +0100, Miguel Carrasquer Vidal wrote:
[big snip]

>On the subject of non-velar labialized/palatalized consonants, I
>was wondering: since in Greek *pj > pt, could not such old
>chestnuts as <ptolis>, <ptolemos> be derived from palatalized *p^
>(*p^lH-).  I know Baltic <pilis> "city" is in itself no
>supportive evidence (-il- [-ir-] is the normal Baltic
>development, even tough Baltic and Slavic offer anomalous cases
>of *ul, *ur which might be worth investigating) and Skt. pu:r-
>might be seen as counterevidence (but p- is a labial after all),
>but I still would regard *p^lH- as a neater solution than e.g.
>Beekes' *tplH- (CIEL, p. 190).

A couple of questions.
1) what then is the standard reconstruction proposed for Skt. pu:r-, Greek
<polis> and Baltic <pilis>? And the prototype meaning assigned to it?

2) is this set considered a good candidate for admission to the (P)IE
lexicon? Stated differently, does attestation in Sanskrit, Greek and Baltic
languages suffice for a data set to be considered part of the (P)IE lexicon?

Thanks,
Roz