From: Patrick C. Ryan
----- Original Message -----From: Glen GordonSent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 3:26 AMSubject: [tied] Tyrrhenian and its relation to IEWell, it turns out that I made the whole thing up about Kerns.
Apparently, I'm thinking of Dolgopolsky and his *ma postclitic.
Unfortunately for me, he intended it to be the "marked
In all, it would seem that I'm the alone in the belief that
Nostratic had an ergative rather than accusative *ma. Oh well,
I don't care![PCR]Credit where credit due. Recognizing mistakes is the first step towards correcting them.[GG]The fact that Sumerian, AA and Kartvelian have no
trace of an *m-accusative should demonstrate (along with other
grammatical peculiarities that I could bore the list with) that
the ending was only used as an accusative for a specific
sub-grouping of Nostratic.[PCR]In view of the fact that Sumerian is an ergative language, it is not at all surprising or significant that it has no ***accusative***-m.[GG]Plus, if we are to speak of an "ergative stage" in preIE, then
why can't this ergative stage be Nostratic itself? If not
Nostratic, when?? During the ProtoWorld stage? :P
Yes, fie with Nostraticists, fie, I say!
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/
"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)