Re: Re: Alb. "vatër" ( it was (Re: [tied] Re: Albanian valle )

----- Original Message -----

From: Miguel Carrasquer

To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 4:19 PM

Subject: Re: Re: Alb. "vatër" ( it was (Re: [tied] Re: Albanian valle )

 

Dear Miguel:

On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 10:32:46 -0600, Patrick Ryan
<proto-language@...> wrote:

>  Let me state, before I ask a few more questions, that I have no point I am advancing (except possibly that the initial laryngeal might cause simultaneously a-coloration AND length).
>
>  1) In Hittite ha:ssa, do you connect the gemination with the final laryngeal?

Yes.

>  2) Why can we not be consistent? Isn't *h2eh1[/3{s}] to be taken as equivalent to *h2ah1?
>
>  3) Aside from length [*a:], what reasons (if any) prompt the reconstruction of the second laryngeal?

The length in Hittite is not caused by any laryngeal.  It is
the normal lengthening of a stressed vowel.

>  4) Would you absolutely rule out a possible reduplication: *h2ah2[a]? I guess your answer is below. What would you expect the Palaic form to be if *h2 were the second laryngeal?

ha:h-

See the discussion of this word in Melchert, "Anatolian
Historical Phonology", p. 78.  Briefly:

 

 

I do not have ready access to Melchert so I would like to ask a clarifying question or two:

 

according to him, medial *h1 simply disappears in Palaic?

 

How about *h3? Would *h2ah3 yield Palaic ha:- or ha:- according to Melchert in Palaic?

 

 

Hitt. há:ssa- must go back to H(e/o)Hs- (there is no other
way to explain -ss- here than through -Hs-).

Latin a:ra must go back to HeH2s- or H2eHs, i.e. one of the
two laryngeals must be *h2.

If the Hittite and Latin words are related to Palaic ha:-,
then the second laryngeal cannot be *h2, therefore the first
laryngeal must be *h2.

We now have:  *h2eh(1/3)s-.

Whether the second laryngeal is *h1 or *h3 is undecidable.
If it is *h3, it would mean that *h2 takes precedence over
*h3 (Lat. a:ra), or that the 1st laryngeal takes precedence
over the 2nd.  Overall, my opinion is that it's more likely
that the second laryngeal is *h1 (and the colouring of *h2
takes precedence over *h1, which causes no colouring, as can
also be seen in the Slavic f. ins. sg. ending *-oyh2eh1 >
-oja: + m > -ojoN).

So, unless someone has yet other arguments, *h2ah1 is a misleading reconstruction for proper *h2ah1/h3? Would you not agree?

 

Pat

 

 

 

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


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/GP4qlB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    cybalist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/