--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
<miguelc@...> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 01:30:16 -0000, "alexandru_mg3"
> <alexandru_mg3@...> wrote:
>
> >This distinction between h1./h2. and h1/h2 is another 'hocus-
pocus'
> >of Mrs. Olsen, Miguel =>
> >
> > 1. the vocalisation of a kind of /x/ in *ph2te'r CANNOT BE
ANYTHING
> >ELSE BUT /Vx/ (by adding a vowel before it /p&x-t'er/)
>
> You are wrong. Like any other syllabic continuant, it can be
> pronounced with a prop-vowel before, a prop-vowel after, or
> no prop-vowel at all.
>
Miguel, in Indo-European? Let's be serious....
Especially in p&x-ter? A prop-vowel after?
Let's be serious.... Can you still move your mouth to say px&-
ter? " :)
Did you have seen in any book a /px&-ter/ reconstruction? you
didn't .
If so why wrote here such things?
Or not a prop-vowel at all? WHEN WE SAW A (resulting) VOWEL A in
Lat.Grk. etc...or I in Skt. => Let's be serious....
For you now:
ph1/ph2- cluster are impossible in PIE as I showed you one for bHh2-
too (pleease don't come back with dubious wods here like
pitencantrop etc...)
ph3- was impossible too => for this reason was transformed to b
(Note: this is a general pattern to you & Piotr whenever you don't
have direct argument you start with generalities : 'there are 3
cases', '2 against the third', 'in english' , 'in another language'
> The distinction between vocalized and non-vocalized
> layngeals is crucial in other soundlaws as well, like for
> instance Hirt's law in Balto-Slavic, where a consonantal
> laryngeal causes retraction of the stress, but a vocalized
> laryngeal does not.
Miguel we are talking here about ASPIRATION
dHugh2ter shows an ASPIRATED g > gh (see duhitar) DUE to a
VOCALIZED h2
ph2ter don't show any pre-aspirated -t- due to a VOCALIZED h2 =>
let's be clear.
Olsen theory is a mistake.
> >Miguel the Laryngeal wasn't vocalized BEFORE or LATER => It was
> >vocalized Since It Was in Existence in order that a Human Being to
> >arrive to pronounce the syllables of ph2ter > something like /p&x-
> >ter/ etc...and that ones of dHugh2ter /dHu-g&x-ter/
>
> Are you implying that the speakers of Bella Coola (Nuxálk)
> are not Human Beings?
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nux%C3%A1lk_language).
>
> Or, for that matter, the French ("retard" = [Xta:X]).
>
>
> =======================
> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
> miguelc@...
Miguel, ("retard" = [Xta:X]) that you quote here is a non-indo-
european word used for non-indo-european peoples to denote in a
pejorative mode some other non-indo-europeans too.
In the Indo-european words spoken by the Indo-European people the
syllabification of Laryngeal didn't happens BEFORE or LATER it
happens whenever somebody try to say :
/dHu-g&x-ter/
/p&x-ter/
I know that in other non-indoeuropean languages could be different
=> but as a native speaker of an Indo-European idiom I can tell you
that this is the case here:
/dHu-g&x-ter/
/p&x-ter/
Marius