Re: [tied] Metathesis - The armchair linguist's favourite tool

From: proto-language
Message: 7954
Date: 2001-07-18

Dear Mark and Cybalisters:

----- Original Message -----
From: markodegard@...
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 2:10 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] Metathesis - The armchair linguist's favourite tool

--- In cybalist@......, "proto-language" <proto-language@......> wrote:

>Møller's notational conventions are a bit off-putting but he
certainly anticipated Lehmann's "syllabicity" stage of IE by
reconstructing bases for IE without indicated vowels: e.g. bh-l-,
'break out'.
'Syllabicity'. This seems to be one of those items like RSP Beekes'
notion that PIE lacked [a]. Everybody smiles behind the Great Man's
back, allowing him a few eccentricities for the sake of his otherwise
brilliant observations.

Well, perhaps Lehmann would be pleased with this left-handed compliment.
However, he put this idea out in the 50's, and I know that he still supports it, inspite of its lack of general acceptance.
I believe that it is the only reasonable explanation of *e/*o Ablaut, and if you think that "eccentric", why not tell me why?
As for Beekes, I am not aware of that view but I would be prepared to defend the idea that everything that appears as /a/ in PIE goes back to an even earlier /a:/.

(501) 227-9947 * 9115 W. 34th St. Little Rock, AR 72204-4441 USA

"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)