Re: The palatal sham :) (Re: [tied] Re: Albanian (1))

>> if we are trying to prove a PIE
> > pattern involving more than one form, we have to find reflexes of
> >more than
> > one form within the same language. Otherwise we only know that
> >some
> > languages show this form, and some that - we can't prove that the
> > alternation was a regular patterning in PIE.
>
> I cannot find a good examples of acrostatic -o- alternating with
> weak-case -e- in which the alternants are from the same language. We
> have /pod-/ in Greek, /ped-/ in Latin, /do(:)m-/ in Armenian, /dem-/
> in Greek, *nokWt- all over the place except Anatolian, *nekWt- only
> in Hittite. Are we not allowed to combine them on the level of PIE?
> And if we are, why must we not do the same with the forms of a-roots?

We can certainly suggest that there was such a pattern. But other
interpretations of the evidence are also possible, such as claiming that
some languages inherited -o-, and others -e- (unlikely though this is).
Now further bits of evidence (or logic) may make the first pattern extremely
likely. But we still can't claim it is proved solely from the alternation
we see in the existing languages, or that the argument is stronger because
it is spread over several languages.

Peter