Re: [tied] Internal reconstruction and PIE

> Looking *only* at IndoEuropean, we can conclude some basic features
> for previous stages of IE, and these features involve the following
> areas:
>
>    Areal influence & contacts:
>    ---------------------------
>     - Early Semitic/Semitic-like loans
>     - Early preNWC loans
>
>   Phonology & stress
>   ------------------
>     - Penultimate-to-mobile accent shift caused by
>       loss of all final vowels
>     - Centralized two-vowel system (*& and *a)
>     - Fortis stop series (*t:/*k:)
>     - Allophonic uvularisation of velars and laryngeals
>       (This concerns later satemisation)
>
>   Morphology
>   ----------
>     - Agglutination
>     - Paradigmatic allophony of unstressed *e and stressed *a
>     - Vowel harmony origins of active-stative ablaut
>
> So, do you want me to explain one of the above points, Ed?

> >Core vocabulary in Etruscan is not IE. Explain the numbers, and
> >numerical morphology, for instance.
>
> In EtruscoLemnian, only numbers "one" to "five", and "nine",
> have IndoTyrrhenian etymologies. The numerals /s'a/ "six", /semph/
> "seven", /s'ar/ "ten" and the /-thrum/ in /zathrum/ "20" are of
> Semitoid origin. The word /cezp/ "eight" (ELem *k:isappi) is a
> compound meaning "three from (five)" (cf. /ci/ "three").
> ...
>          *t:Wei, *t:We- "two"
>               OIE *t:Wei, *t:Wa- (IE *dwo-, *dwo:u)
>               ELem *ce- (Etr /zal/ "two", /zathrum/ "twenty")
> ...
>          *mek:xe "to be large"
>               OIE *mek:xe (IE *meg^x-)
>               ELem *meke "five" (Etr /mach/)
>                    *moxale-kon "fifty" (Etr /muvalch/)