Mate:
>OK. I just think it is more logical to assume that it was the common system
>and not just common Satem system. My opinion is that there is no Satem
>group as a group of closely related PIE dialects. There is just a
>satem-sound
>change of *k' to some kind of *s, *s^, *s etc.
Isn't what Piotr saying about Albanian working against your view? If
it's true that there is evidence to show that there was delabialization of
*kW
to *k _before_ *q had merged to *k, then I fail to see how we can make
that work by replacing *q in these equations with "plain *k". We'd end up
with an earlier merger with *kW. Did you miss something or I?
>As I said, I do not accept Satem as a localized group.
It is far more difficult to theorize that there were multiple events of
satemization than a single event. That's just good ol' fashioned statistics.
A typical isogloss map seems to show that it was a small area while
centum languages are typically outliers, no?
>It can be but it is not a *direct* attestation because it is also possible
>that *q > *k was pre-PIE or that the frequency of *k and *k' can be
>explained differently as I have done.
Of course you have. You've explained it by the same lack of evidence.
Pushing it to "pre-IE" is only a matter of convenience on your part,
but not strong arguement against. Yes, even I would concede in
such a possibility, but, it's still not clear.
>Also, many linguists do not accept PIE *a at all [...]
Only because they throw normal phonology right out the window and
have little understanding of linguistics. Name a language that has no
low vowel and I promise to cough of blood. Again, so rare that it's not
considerable. Yes, Mate, it's possible just like a hydrogen bomb under
the table... just not at all likely. So knock it off with the "but some
quacks say such and such" derailment. Many people say a lot of things
but the important thing is that it has to make sense given the evidence.
ALL evidence, including important linguistic tendencies.
>Others have already given many examples. I don't think that IIr influence
>is possible here.
Yes, you're right. I misplaced the Luwian palatalization evidence in my
swiss-cheese head. However, it has no bearing on the validity of the
uvular arguement.
= gLeN
_________________________________________________________________
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963