"Laryngeal metathesis" has a technical
meaning in IE studies. It has been proposed that roots of the type *CeH- with
*-i- and *-u- "extensions" formed nil grades like *CiH-/*CuH- (beside expected
*CHi-/*CHu-). This device was invented mainly in order to account for
alternations like *po:-/*pi:-/*poi- 'drink' or *dHe:-/*dHi:-/*dHei-/*dHoi-
'suck(le)' (allegedly *peh3(-i)-/*pih3-, *dHeh1(-i)-/*dHih1-). My own
(published) analysis of such alternations does not make use of laryngeal
metathesis (or variation between unextended and extended roots) and explains
them as regular phonological developments of pre-laryngeal diphthongs.
Metathesis involving laryngeals probably happened sporadically just like
metathesis involving other types of segments, but some linguists tend to employ
it as a universal problem-solving technique -- which is all too easy, as
laryngeals are attested sparsely and often indirectly, and can't protest if you
shuffle them to and fro. My opinion is that reconstructions should not
manipulate laryngeals more freely than other segments.
As for "mass (or multilateral) comparison"
(as opposed to the standard comparative method), it basically consists in
collecting vocabulary lists for many languages and running eyeballing
comparisons in the hope of detecting similarities that might be due to common
descent rather than chance or other factors (the practitioners of the method
usually argue that the observed cannot be attributed be due to chance if they
are "sufficiently" numerous). Crucially, regular sound correspondences are not
required, nor is it necessary to account for the derivation and history of each
"matching" form. This means that the basic requirements of the
comparative method are relaxed and there are no formal controls on
what counts as a "resemblance". These aspects of the method are what its
critics most often emphasise.
Piotr
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 11:43 AM
Subject: [tied] Re: Metathesis - The armchair linguist's favourite
tool
That's all very interesting. What I would like to know, does anyone
know how likely metathesis involving laryngeals is to occur (based on
fact, please)?
And does anyone have a working definition of "mass
comparison" (as
opposed to?)?
Torsten