Re: Brugmann's Law

From: fournet.arnaud
Message: 51325
Date: 2008-01-16

 
----- Original Message -----
From: Patrick Ryan
To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 9:23 PM
Subject: [Courrier indésirable] Re: Re: Re: Re: [tied] Brugmann's Law

 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 1:32 PM
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: [tied] Brugmann's Law

 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 8:10 PM
Subject: [Courrier indésirable] Re: Re: Re: [tied] Brugmann's Law

 
 
What about :
Arabic &aqrub
Greek skorpion
 
Root q_r_b is the same as in (s-)k_r_p
the p in scorpion is another example of correspondence with -b-.
That was what I meant.
Arnaud
============ ===
The ultimate PIE root is *ka(:)r-, 'hard'; to it, either -*bhi, 'animal', or -*pi, 'insect', may be added as in *embhi-/*empi- .
Semitic has chose -*bh(i); PIE has chosen -*pi in this word.
They are related but only through *ka(:)r- probably because -*bh(Ii) was used for 'crab'.
PCR
=============
Arnaud
Impossible.
The -k- in skorpion is unvoiced because of s-.
Otherwise from q, one should expect -g- (no fuzzy law in that case)
This root for "skorpion" is : k?_r_p.
And the assumption that -p "must" be a suffix is superficial
-r- can also be an infix
More data is needed to see clear.
And there is no need to re-analyse k?_r_p = "scorpion"
============
It had at least these.
And some others.
"Laryngeals" is a misleading word
Not all disappeared phonemes are "laryngeal"
they are functionally "laryngeal" but phonetically
they are not "laryngeal".
Arnaud
 
(2)***
What in Heaven's name is "functionally 'laryngeal'" ?
PCR
***
H2 is a class of proto-phonemes that :
- colors in /a/, what is described by *e in orthodox PIE
 
This class of phonemes includes :
- ? & h (functionally + phonetically laryngeal)
- z dz s? ts? (only functionally laryngeal)
 
I hope this can meet your level of understanding.
 
Arnaud
============ ========= ===
This is non sense
Not a word of it is worth considering
Arnaud
============ =
A judgment of nonsense from a person who cannot spell the word is hardly confidence inspiring.
Patrick
***
That reminds me of a sentence about Nixon :
"this is not a man : he's a word-processor."
 
What about confidence-inspiring with <-> ?
Does it tell about the author ?
Arnaud
 
 
.