The present article carries on a series of studies in the root structure in PIE and focuses on the traces of root extension by means of particle absorption. The comparative derivational analysis of the secondary adverb/preverb OCS skvozě ‘through’ and the root-related family (so far, with no plausible etymological connection) helps identify in Balto-Slavic traces of the Proto-Indo-European spatial adverb and particle *(H)eǵh of ablative semantics that was productive for a period of time in Balto-Slavic and later on in Slavic. In particular, Balto-Slavic shows the enclitic zero-grade allomorph, otherwise probably tangible in Skt. ba-h-íṣ ‘outside’ and beyond. In Balto-Slavic, *-ǵh got fossilized in a series of prepositions (of which seven are discussed in detail) and likely amalgamated in a handful of Proto-Indo-European roots contributing to their compound semantics. In G. Dunkel’s analysis of the Indo- European evidence summarized in LIPP, preference is given to the classification of the postponed *ǵh-containing particle exclusively as a word or sentence intensifier, which is formally, as well as micro- and macro-semantically difficult. In this paper I revisit the conclusive material that makes it necessary to reanalyse the structure of a series of inherited spatial adpositions and adverbs. As I show, the morphosemantic template as found in the showcase example skvozě lives on in numerous formations scattered across the Indo-European branches, whereas formal discrepancies impeding hitherto conclusive reconstruction are accounted for in terms of paradigmatic variation of the encliticized anaphoric pronoun (casus rectus vs. casus obliqui of different gender forms). Judging from the panchronic perspective and adducing the evidence of modern Indo-European languages where the same morphosemantic template is fully productive allows us to draw a tentative model of the cognitive capture of spatial reference which appears basically invariant and is obviously conceived as natural by the speakers of Indo-European. The latter aspect, namely that of clear cognitive plausibility in linguistic reconstruction makes up one of the methodological stand- points the author promotes. Beyond that, the paper examines a number of further fossilized traces of *(He)ǵh in secondary roots of ‘piercing’ semantics.