[tied] Re: illyrian lexicon or inventory

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski
<piotr.gasiorowski@...> wrote:

> 15-11-03 00:08, Abdullah Konushevci wrote:
>
> > It is worth to
> > notice that palatal *g^h- yields spirant /s/, that is another
> > argument of the thesis that Illyrian was satem too.
>
> Assuming that Oseriates are 'Lakefolk', which is extremely

doubtful. The

> pre-form of the Balto-Slavic word was *(h1)eg^Hero-, with *e-, not

*o-,

> *ozero being a dialectal Slavic development from earlier *ezero).

Even

> in the unlikely case that the Oseri- ([ozeri-]?) part should have
> anything to do with *eg^Hero-, the following front vowel would be
> sufficient to account for the palatalisation and assibilation of

the

> velar, even in a centum language. We don't classify French as Satem
> although it has /sa~/ for *k^m.tom, do we?
>
> Piotr

************
No we don't. But, it is not a reason to not treat Illyrian as satem,
or Albanian, or Slavic languages, isn't it?
At least, this problem was solved, concerning Illyrian, thanks to
Cimohowsky (see message "Illyrian as satem").

Konushevci