On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 21:55:20 +0200 Miguel Carrasquer <
mcv@...> writes:
> On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 20:41:59 +0200, Mate Kapovic <mkapovic@...>
> wrote:
>
> >If *k comes from *ka, and *k' not only from older *ki, but also
> from *ke
> >(and in parallel maybe besides *kw < *ku also *kw < *ko) it would
> be
> >expected that *k would be less frequent than *k' (and *kw).
>
> What that shows is that *k^ should have been as frequent as *kW. It
> isn't:
> it's much more frequent.
couldn't *e and *i be more frequent than *o and *u, thus making *k^ more
frequent than *kW?
--
__ __ ____ ____
/ / ___ ____ ___ ___ / /__ / __// __/
/ _ \/ _ `/ _ \ (_-</ _ \/ / _ \/__ \/__ \
/_//_/\_,_/_//_/__/___/\___/_/\___/____/____/
/___/
Robert Wilson
http://www.kuvazokad.tk/ --
http://kuvazokad.free.fr/
http://www.rahxephonwallpapers.tk/
http://www.zipit.tk/
vkky vnkynvj vknyknj ykkv knvy? karkalone kontoko? kinsi rorotan kinsa
nadas? baitta ke farzaiyai? zres �u �jass? rkqxeoitns fxkioxtexikrtx ixqa
yxnomk atpukno ujklevt? pake biru ka pa rede? wa kasu kasano na to?
gmemte te gmetmam tirakem? tsx�xkxye tsx�x r�jtyxn�sz? spreken �u
viserdya?
________________________________________________________________
The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!