----- Original Message -----

From: Glen Gordon

To: nostratic@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 2:15 PM

Subject: [nostratic] Origin of IE e~o~0 ablaut

Patrick:
>In my opinion, this table is one of the worst examples of Bomhard's proposals.

Please, Danny, let's ignore this cancer who should have been moderated with long ago. Patrick is trapped in a 19th-century Indo-Semitic dillusion and obviously has trouble being anything other than depressing and abrasive when forming his arguements. Patrick's "syllabicity" pet theory, which is nothing other than a monophonemic vowel system, is not found in any language known to humankind.

[PCR]

This theory was originated by one of the finest theorists of IE who has ever lived, Winfred P. Lehmann, whose work is universally respected.

I believe, and so do others, that this theory explains the facts in a superior way.

[???]

Even if it were one day, it fails to explain *e/*o ablaut when forming stative/non-stative verb forms in IE. (It doesn't explain the initial subtle difference in semantics between either ablaut form.)

 [PCR]

There is no correlation between IE root *e and stative forms, and none between IE root *o and non-stative forms.

If anything, the reverse may be true.

However, the best explanation of the *e/*o-Ablaut that I have come across is to explain it as the phonological result of shifts in stress-accent in a period when tone-accent was either introduced or was mingled with it.

 

Pat

 

PATRICK C. RYAN | PROTO-LANGUAGE@...
(501) 227-9947 * 9115 W. 34th St. Little Rock, AR 72204-4441 USA
WEBPAGES: PROTO-LANGUAGE: http://www.geocities.com/proto-language/
and PROTO-RELIGION:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/2803/proto-religion/indexR.html

"Veit ec at ec hecc, vindgá meiði a netr allar nío,
geiri vndaþr . . . a þeim meiþi, er mangi veit,
hvers hann af rótom renn." (Hávamál 138)