Re: Internal reconstruction and PIE

--- In cybalist@..., "Glen Gordon" <glengordon01@...> wrote:

> Torsten:
> >--- In cybalist@..., "Glen Gordon" <glengordon01@...> wrote:
> > > *k:Wel "three"
> > > OIE *k:Wel-ei (MIE *k:Weléi-es > IE *tréies)
> > > (*-ei = [plural])
> > > ELem *k:i (Etr /ci/)
> > >
> >I couldn't find the rules that apply in this example on MIE > IE on
> >your home page. Would you explain?
>
> I updated that page in part. There should be something there...
> Oh well. The numerals don't follow these rules as perfectly as
> I'd like them to because numerals, since they are part of a
> larger system, tend to influence each other and have a different
> dynamic.
>
> I'm unsure of when it happened exactly but it was probably when
> consonant clusters were forming in Late MidIE due to heavy stress.
> This *k:Weléi- had just became *k:Wléi-. Here, it might have become
> *t:Wléi- when influenced by *t:Waxe "two" (> *dwo:u) and

*t:eu "one".

> So then, we had the series from "one" to "four" as follows:
> [*t:eu, *t:Waxe, *t:Wléies, *kWetWores].
>
> However, *t:Wleies might have then been further affected by
> the -tW- and -r- in *kWetWores "four". This eventually caused
> the following, more familiar series [*t:eu, *t:Waxe,
> *tWréies, *kWetWores]. The initial labial of the consonant cluster
> disappeared (it's not the first time since it happened in "eight"
> as well) and caused *tréies. BTW, *t:eu was replaced by *oinos at
> a very late date with a new formation based on the pronominal
> stem *ei-.
>
> Hope that clarifies. If you see logical problems with this, let
> me know.
>
> -------------------------------------------------
> gLeNny gEe
> ...wEbDeVEr gOne bEsErK!
>

I have a sneaking suspicion you see some yourself.
There are *T-l- (+ T) "3" in Semitic, and there are Austronesian

toru, tolu, tilu, tiru, taru, tero,
tru, tlu, tel, tal, tl-

forms and even West African forms that look more similar (now please
don't reply something with Armenian erku).

Torsten