[tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory?

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, enlil@... wrote:

> Jens:
> > It is a true error to posit *-o under any guise, including "*-a",
> > for what the thematic vowels demand is *-e
>
> And it is THAT that is the true error. It's not a thematic vowel,
> there is no *-e as we can all understand, so Jens, you're in error.
> Prove that it IS an alternating vowel or forfeit this nonsense.

The relative pronounhas a stem commonly posited as *yo-. So it is
thematic, and thus its vocalism falls under the rule applying to the
thematic vowel. Well, that is *-e when word-final. That's the way it
is in the language we are talking about. What has been dreamt up as
older stages of this conflicting with it cannto stand.

Jens