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

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "elmeras2000" <jer@...> wrote:

> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...>
> wrote:
>
> > Are we bound to not inserting intermediate stages, but have to
> bundle
> > the whole thing within one reconstructed language?
>
> Ideally, yes. If the IE languages are related, there must have been
> a language from which they are all descended, and it is our main
> objective to uncover that. And all true archaisms must have a place
> in that reconstruction.
>

My concern was that if we assume no intermediate steps, and if there
were indeed loans taking place between IE branches, the individual
selection of which of course takes no phonological considerations,
any reconstruction attempt we make of that elusive first language
will be garbled by mysterious alternations we can't account for.

Torsten