Re: [tied] The Precise and scientific nature of PIE reconstruction.

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:

> On Thu, 07 Apr 2005 21:15:45 +0000, mkelkar2003
> <smykelkar@...> wrote:
>
> >Here is how PIE reconstruction works as explained by McWhorter (2001,
> >p. 45-46). He gives seven IE cognates for the word "sister-in-law".
> >
> >Sanskrit: snusha
>
> snus.á:
>
> >Greek: nuós
> >
> >Old English: snoru Armenian: nu
> >
> >Russian: snokha Albenian: nuse
> >
> >Latin: nurus
> >
> >In Armenian and Albenian the word actually means bride not
> >sister-in-law. He explains this phenomenon as an example of semantic
> >change.
> >
> >The PIE word is reconstructed as follows:
> >
> >1. The word should begin with sn rather than n. The missing s in the
> >languages has been lost due to attrition.
>
> *s- is always lost in Greek and Armenian. In Albanian and
> Latin sn- > n- is regular.
>
> >2. The first vowel must be u rather than an o. Russian and Old
> >English have muted that to an o. The majority rule applies here.
>
> No. It has nothing to do with majority. It has to do with
> knowledge about the languages in question. PIE *u gives
> Slavic /U/, and that's exactly what we find in OCS snUxa.
> The hard yer regularly gives zero or /o/ in Russian.
> In Germanic, PIE *u gives /o/ or /u/ (PIE *o gives /a/),
> depending on the front or backness of the following vowel.
> *snusa: regularly gives *snora:.
>

Sir this is all tautological. You are FORCING these languages into a
"family" by reconstructing an artifcial word. If you "reconstruct" it
as "snosos" then you could not arrive at the Sanskrit word because
according to your own rule you could not derive *u from /o/. I do not
know what OCS means but i have a feeling that snUxa is NOT a real word
and "Slavic" is not a language. Is that right? Therefore you are
recontrucing these words so you can keep as many languages as possible
in the "family." It is kind of twisted.

> > So far the proto word is *snu
> >
> >3. The next consonant should be an s as shown in Sanskrit, Albenian
> >and Greek. S has mutated to a k in Russian and r in Latin and Old
> >English. Therefore, *snus
>
> Actually, /s/ gives /s^/ after *u in all the satem
> languages, so we have snus^a: in Sanskrit *snus^a: > snUxa
> in Slavic.
>
> Intervoalic /s/ gives /z/ and then /r/ independently in
> Latin and Germanic.
>
> >4. So far so good. The most twisted part is the ending. The majority
> >of the above seven words have a masculine ending except for Sansrkit
> >and Russian.
>
> No. Old English has a feminine ending too, and so does
> Albanian.
>
> >So the original PIE word MUST be masculine! and end with
> >an os rather than an "a" a feminine ending, as it does CORRECTLY in
> >Sanskrit and Russian. Therefore PIE *snusos. Science does not work
> >by the rule of the majority.
>
> No, science works by logic. Disregarding the Albanian word,
> the ending of which is not secure, we have the following
> situation:
>
> Sanskrit, Germanic and Slavic point to *snusá: (f.)

Not so fast my friend! Sanskrit is a REAL language and Germanic and
Slavic are "families" that you have made up. Do every single language
you are including in these families point to *snusa?

> Greek and Armenian point to *snusós (m.)
> Latin points to *snusú:s (f.)
>
> The Latin ending is analogical after socrus "mother-in-law"
> (*swekru:), and the pre-Latin form was doubtlessly *snusós,
> as in Greek and Armenian.
>
> We can now choose to reconstruct *snusá: or *snusós. If the
> proto-form was *snusá:, we have to explain why this word,
> denoting a female person, acquired the normally masculine
> ending *-os in Greek, Armenian and Latin. This goes against
> all logic. If the proto-form was *snusós, on the other
> hand, it is trivial to explain why the ending *-os was
> replaced by feminine *-a: in Sanskrit, Germanic and Slavic.

That equally goes against logic. How did the masculine ending suddenly
get "perfected?" By who? When? And why did the others not "perfect" it?

>
> So logic dictates that the original form was *snusós.
>
>
> =======================
> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
> mcv@...

M. Kelkar