Re: Grimm's Law is about to expire (Collinge 1985, p. 267, Thundy 1

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "mkelkar2003" <swatimkelkar@...> wrote:

>

> Thank you Dr. Wordingham for these detailed examples. The following
> are real words:
>
> Skt _bandHati_, Greek _pentHeros_, English _bind_
>
> Great! There are laws needed to explain why the b and p are going back
> and forth. But the English word bind (or an earlier OE word) is not
> attested till 3000 years later. So why must the proto language be
> reconstructed to accomodate all three?

They aren't going back and forth.

Since all three languages attest the form, and they are related by
regular sound changes, and there's no reason to suspect a borrowing,
then the most rational assumption is that the word is reconstructable
for the proto language.

> Now PIE is not real. Why the insistance on fitting reality to a
> hypothetical reconstruction? The hypothetical reconstruction should
> fit reality. Please read the above again "the FACT that no other
> Indo-European langauges have Grassman's law."

This indicates that Grassman's Law did not operate in PIE.

> Now that is NOT A FACT because PIE is not a FACT. In other words where
> is the guarantee that the "deaspiration in Greek took place after the
> change of
> > > Proto-Indo-European *bH, dH, gH to /pH, tH, kH"

This is actually quite easy to explain. If the deaspiration to place
before the devoicing then the Greek would have a voiced stop instead
of a voiceless stop. You'd have bH > b instead of bH > pH > p.