Miguel:
>Unrelated forms (that also includes, unless I'm mistaken, the
>"woopsies" under /w-/).
Obviously /wupse/ isn't easy to connect to the rest but it would seem that
/woli/, /woro/, /we/, /wedi/ are relatable. Why is there an objection to
relating /ga:de/, /waga:de/, /ga:de/ and /ka:di/? Afterall, it all belongs
to the same grouping and these forms merely rhyme with the f- and w- forms.
It seems like you're trying desperately to push a *p.wat- reconstruction
that isn't there.
>>So you're saying that the word for
>>seven in AA was with a */p./... like *sap.x-?!
>
>Yes (*sap.Ga-?).
An ejective with a laryngeal right after. How odd. Have you ever tried
pronouncing your reconstructions?
- gLeN
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
http://www.hotmail.com