--- In cybalist@..., "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@...> wrote:
> If it's a wanderwort, then of course the question arises whether
the historical prestige of Ancient Egyptian justifies the assumption
that Egyptian *must* be the source. For methodological reasons I'm
also against lumping together *per(n)-, *p(o)lh1-, *bHerg^H- and a
variety of Nostratic "cognates" with loosely matching meanings just
because they happen to contain a substring definable as [labial stop]V
[rhotic/lateral].
>
> Piotr
>
>
Of course I'm also against all this lumping on methodological
grounds, but if I don't make a big lump then no one will have the
chance to pick out their favorite set and disapprove of the rest of
the lump. I'm just being social.
Torsten