Reasons (was [tied] Re: Some thoughts...)
From: Sean Whalen
--- Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...
> To begin with, you propose a
> pre-PIE phonemic
> inventory but no justification for it. How did you
> arrive at your
> system? What do you posit things like *f for -- just
> for the sake of
> symmetry, or on some concrete evidence? And if it's
> the latter, _what_
> is the evidence and what explanatory advantage does
> your reconstruction
> offer us?
I posited a more symmetrical phonology to see if the
extra phones would provide any explanatory advantages,
and each did. In place of laryngeals there are xj, x,
and xv to account for all V changes. Nasals nj can
account for sounds y and n from one source
(suyus/sunus, -(a)ya/-na affixes in vowels) mv for acc
shows why metathesized -fmv>-mvf needs no vowel (same
place of articulation) and mv>xv after nasal will
provide explanation for -r/-n neuters (with later
rules) and saxa`lmv>saxwa`l>saxwe'l. Sr-/str- is
explained by sr>str and f>s, without pl -f I'd get
Vms>V:m by my rules for acc pl. -fi>-fu explains
different loc sng and pl.
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.