Miguel to Jens:
>Allright. I feared you had abandoned the analysis through *dek^mt-os >
>*dek^m-tos. Any other examples of -Cos > -os apart from neogn�s (if it is
>that)?
I wish he had. It still remains unproven assumption that *dekm and *-kmt-
are not anything more than _different_ stems. The aberrant post-IE instances
of what appear to be forms derived from **dekmt are not adequate proof
because numeric analogies happen far too frequently and it is the form
*dekm that is the norm in IE. It's simply an extra theory of Jens that need
not be assumed. Without assuming, we don't need to waste time
explaining in further detail why the idea often doesn't work.
>Allright, that's my point of departure too. So what do you think are the
>phonotactic conditions?
Good luck. I think the simpler hypothesis is far more ergonomic rather than
banging a head into a wall for hours on end trying to figure out how *m,
*n, *i, *u and *r can all be phonetically related to each other at the same
time. It's rather a proposterous game bordering on schizophrenia.
>Now all that's required is a palatalization law to explain -i- < *n^.
It's not required at all. Simply put: *n is *n and *y is *y.
It's no rocket science unless we try to make it that way.
= gLeN
_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/bcomm&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca