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

Jens:

>>> It is a true error to posit *-o under any guise, including "*-a",
>>> for what the thematic vowels demand is *-e

Me:

>> 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.

Jens:

> 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.

That it is a thematic proves nothing. We see both alternating and
non-alternating paradigms.


= gLeN