Re: [tied] kentum and satem

How should be classified in terms "kentum/satem" the following languages
- Illyrian
- Phrygian
- Armenian
- Macedonian
- Albanian
- Thracian
if we take as the criterion
a) palatalisation
b) collapsing k+k' vs k+kW ?

Alexander

----- Original Message -----
From: "P&G" <petegray@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2003 11:03 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] kentum and satem


>
> >Current view show Kentum languages as more conservative (so not
necessarily
> >monophyletic), while Satem was a monophyletic branch (k^> palatals),
>
> No. The palatalisation of k' is also explained as a wave phenomenon,
only
> showing that the satem languages were closer geographically, not that they
> were monophyletic. Satem is one of the most over-worked isoglosses;
there
> are others far more significant that split the IE languages in other ways.
>
> A better way to see the kentum/satem isogloss is to ignore the
> palatalisation, and ask what collapses with what. Kentum collapses k and
> k'; satem collapses k and kW.
>
> Peter
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>