From: fournet.arnaud
Message: 58470
Date: 2008-05-14
----- Original Message -----
From: "Patrick Ryan" <proto-language@...>
>> > ***
>>
>> In these exemples, the vowel a: is long,
>> something that is just as strange as short *a showing up only in the
>> initial.
>> In fact, _you_ are the one wrong.
>> The data that you alleged as proof are in fact a whole body of data,
>> that is abnormal from the start.
>> This long a: should be interpreted as eH2.
>> this is no **CaC, as Meillet and others noticed one century ago.
>>
>> Arnaud
>>
>> ============
>
> ***
>
> Patrick:
Mauvais comme d'habitude,
Dixit Arnaud.
>
> *bal-bal, *badyos, *baita:-, *bak-, *band-, *bar-bar- . . .
> Meillet, like you, was wrong! *CaC- exists plentifully.
>
=========
These words with the rare #b- really prove nothing.
Arnaud.
=========
>> No,
>> you can't allege long vowels to be a proof that short vowels existed.
>
> ***
>
> Patrick:
> Mauvais comme d'habitude, Arnaud.
> I allege nothing! Those are Pokorny reconstructions.
> *e: = *e + *e; of course, *e: implies the existence of *e.
>
=========
Wrong.
Slavic long a: does not prove that short a exists in Slavic.
Short a became short o.
Your problem is your complete failure to understand phonology.
This is where all your problems start.
Arnaud
========
> ***
>
> Patrick:
>
> The Vocalic Theory is 'vocalic' because it seeks to explain the quality of
> long vowels in PIE by the quality of the short vowels in pre-PIE.
>
=======
This does not describe your theory.
Miguel's theory claims to do the same.
Arnaud
===========
>> > Patrick:
>> >
>> > The Vocalic Theory cannot be expected to explain what is not.
>> >
>> ========
>> The laryngeal theory explains both what is and what is not,
>
> ***
>
> Patrick:
>
> A psychiatrist is in order for you, Arnaud. No sane theory explains what
> is not.
>
==========
Let's sum up again the facts :
Initial : e o a exist
C_C : e o exist
long vowel : e: o: a: exist
The laryngeal theory explain why the hole of non existent short a.
Your theory does not.
No need for psychiatrist,
get yourself a handbook of phonology.
Arnaud
======
> Patrick:
>
> Mauvais comme d'habitude, Arnaud.
>
> I gave you a list of just a few words with *Ca above.
>
> *bal-bal, *badyos, *baita:-, *bak-, *band-, *bar-bar- . . .
>
> That can be repeated for every initial *C in Pokorny.
>
> Are you totally oblivious to the actual data?
>
=====
*a is conspicuous rare and does not enter in any morphological alternation.
This is the major fact in favor of the standard theory.
Arnaud
==============
> Patrick:
>
> I have explained on many occasions what I mean by *A. *A = *e/*o/*°/*Ø.
>
> Do you not even read emails?
>
==========
This *A does not make any sense.
Arnaud
============