From: kalyan97
Message: 12098
Date: 2002-01-20
--- In cybalist@..., "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@...> wrote:
I was trying to sift through the anger in some of the previous
postings to see what the point is all about in Iranian palatals.
I hope members will bear with me for requesting for clarification on
one issue.
Misra seems to suggest that the split of a to a,e,o in Avestan can be
explained but that the rules for such a split in Greek, Latin and
other IE languages cannot be determined. This understanding leads him
to state that "these languages belong to a much later date, when
there were generalisations and several other phonological and
morphological changes.(pp.46-47)."
Miguel says:
If "the change of a to a,e,o in Greek, Latin and to a,e in several
other languages was a change for which no condition can be
determined", then logically there was no such change, or it belongs to
a much earlier date.
Piotr says:
Rather than moderate his crackpot views, he merely parades some more
examples of a > e/o/a/... splits, as if anybody doubted that such
things are possible in general...
I do not see in these answers the reasons why Misra's argument on
chronology of Avestan is not valid.
Pray, help me understand, in terms of IE linguistics, why Misra's
arguments are not sound or are illogical (not crackpot). I do not
think he was trying to counter Hock; it appears that he has not even
read Hock's 1996 criticism.