Re: The palatal sham :) (Re: [tied] Re: Albanian (1))

On Tue, 27 Jan 2004 10:49:35 +0100, Mate Kapovic <mkapovic@...> wrote:

>But you have to admit that the evidence for PIE *a is very slim.

No, I can't admit that. The evidence is quite solid.

>> 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.
>
>Yes, as you and Miguel keep on saying... :-) But I think it does.

The point is that if the uvular theory is valid for PIE, it's also valid
for Proto-Anatolian. If a satem shift can be explained from a system /k q
kW/ (as in Wakashan), it can be explained within Anatolian (-> Luwian) as
easily as within (non-Anatolian) PIE (-> Balto-Slavic, Indo-Iranian,
Albanian, Armenian).

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