Re: [tied] IIr 2nd Palatalisation (was: PIE voiceless aspirates)

From: etherman23
Message: 41948
Date: 2005-11-09

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Ryan" <proto-language@...>
wrote:
>

> To assert, as David did - repeatedly - that PIE *k^[(h)] results in Old
> Indian <c> is just flat out wrong; and he withdrew from the
discussion, it
> appears to me, in lieu of just honestly admitting his false
characterization
> of the data, the falsity of which can be immediately determined by
anyone
> with an IE dictionary.

Perhaps I've missed it, but where did he make that claim?