Re: [tied] Laryngeal theory as an unnatural

From: Glen Gordon
Message: 18320
Date: 2003-01-31

Miguel, concerning the nasal broohaha:
>The rule does not apply to *men-. It applies to *mo(n)- > *ma(n)-.

Which, as usual, is senseless. How would a nasal cause *o to
become *a? Why are there instances of *mo-? Are you suggesting
that all roots with *-a- and neighbouring nasal derive from
*-o-?


>The handful attested cases of PIE *mo- can be explained as *mwe- > *mo- (as
>Latin molo: "to grind" < *mwelo:, Grk. mule:).
>The rest has *ma-.

Yet another ad hoc rule. How many sound rules now -- 12,388?


>No way, because of Sanskrit m�dati/-te: (and m�ndati). The only laryngeal
>solution would be full-grade *mh2ad-.

Regardless, you thus admit it _can_ be solved by a laryngeal.
So why side _against_ Occam's Razor by proposing a trigger
different from the one already proven to have operated in IE?


- gLeN


_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail