Re: [tied] IS's "regular roots"

On Thu, 25 Jan 2001 22:13:00 , "Glen Gordon"
<glengordon01@...> wrote:

>Miguel:
>>Utter nonsense. If *CVC is all you have, you need all the phonemes
>>you can get! And if a simplified phonemic system is what you want,
>>you can't have *CVC.
>
>Which is utter nonsense? What you just said? Yes, I agree, you _are_ talking
>nonsense. Tell your theory to the Samoans or the Philipinos. They'll have a
>good laugh. Here's some online Tagalog lessons for you:
>
> http://www.seasite.niu.edu/tagalog/
>
>Tagalog is a prevalent language in Winnipeg and has a very limited phonology
>with a simple CVC syllable structure.

So now it's syllable structure? Look, I've just lost a 30G hard
disk, so I'm not in a terribly good mood. This what you said:

>His *CVC- is a very appropriate root structure for Nostratic and I think
>that this happens to be the structure of the majority of Nostratic roots
>anyway.

So fucking syllable structure has nothing to do with it.

=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...