Re: Proper methodology (was: RE: [tied] Re: Mother of all IE langua

On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 08:51:01 +0000, Glen Gordon <glengordon01@...>
wrote:

>
>Miguel:
>>The damage was minimized by the irregular development of the 2pl. nom.
>>(*úsW instead of **sésW, also *usmé ~ *wos instead of *sWsmé [= Hitt. smas,
>>Av. xs^ma] ~ **sWos), and the semantic development of the 3rd. p. pronoun
>>into a reflexive (except in Hittite), with only oblique forms.
>
>It's as if you merge the definition of "Pre-IE" and "IE" together in a
>chaotic mess.
>Your **sWsme is surely a Pre-IE reconstruction and yet you claim Hittite and
>Avestan derives from it.

Yes, they do.

>There has to be an IE reconstruction relating to Hittite you have in mind
>since Hittite is an Indo-European language. We know **sWsme isn't a valid IE
>reconstruction -- there is no **sW

There sure is. *-sW (unlike *-s) gives Armenian -k` in the Auslaut. It
also gives Av. xs^v-, Slavic s^-, Celtic s^w- (We. chw-) in the Anlaut.

>and consonant clustering of sibilants like that sort just doesn't happen.

OK, that seems to be true. It was simpified to *sWmé.

=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...