Re: [tied] bh:p-l:r-

--- In cybalist@..., "Glen Gordon" <glengordon01@...> wrote:

>
> Torsten conveys:
> >That p/w thing intrigues me.
>
> It shouldn't. It specifically involves the Hattic language. It
> has nothing to do with IE, AfroAsiatic or the lost language of
> Mu. The sound [f] couldn't be written in the Hattic cuneiform,
> a script which wasn't even designed for the Hattic language. It
> doesn't mean that Hattic people walked around randomly pronouncing
> words with [p] or with [w].
>

Allow me a quote:

"
And yes, there apparently is even p/w alternation for the word for
"house" (pil, pel, wil, wel). Some p-words don't exhibit the
alternation in written Hattic, some do. The "house" word does.
"

And what is that then supposed to mean?

If there is alternation in a language ("specically involving that
language"), either form can be borrowed into another language. That
much should be obvious.

Torsten