Re: [tied] Pronunciation of "r" - again?

----- Original Message -----
From: "david_russell_watson" <liberty@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 7:20 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] Pronunciation of "r" - again?


> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, glen gordon <glengordon01@...> wrote:

<snip>

> to which you were responding in the first place, I
> was quoting a claim of Patrick's from earlier in the
> thread, one which I personally give no credence, and
> which is what prompted me to enter the thread in the
> first place. :^)
>
> (and round and round we go!)
>
> David

***
Patrick:

Laryngeal theorists usually assume three different "laryngeals", which they
call *H1, *H2, *H3, and then squabble over what they were phonetically.

What PIE-derived language has three "laryngeals"?

Two "laryngeals"? Germanic if you count the glottal stop and /h/, even
though it is not a _retention_ from PIE. Hittite, if you assume initial
vowels are really /?V/.

One "laryngeal"? Ah, some IE languages have a glottal stop. Close enough.

Arabic has four "laryngeals", /?, h, ¿, H/.

I make the claim again: Arabic has _retained_ "laryngeals" (really laryngals
and pharyngals) better (more) than any PIE-derived language.

You still think this is wrong? Tell us all why. Your cavalier lack of
credence somehow does not completely satisfy.

***