Re: [tied] Re: Short and long vowels

----- Original Message -----
From: "Patrick Ryan" <proto-language@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 12:07 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] Re: Short and long vowels


>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "P&G" <G&P@...>
> To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 1:40 AM
> Subject: Re: [tied] Re: Short and long vowels
>
>
> > >> > Bomhard and I differ on the details of the correspondences,
> > >> That's significant though, because your two voices don't constitute
> > >> cumulative support
> > > that is ridiculous.
> >
> > If the two reconstructions are both possible, then neither is
> > convincing.
> >
> > Peter
> ,
> ***
> Patrick:
>
> Well, first you might try reading one or the other or both.
>
CORRECTION-----------

> For example, if I think Egyptian d3, 'tremble', is related to PIE *der-,
> 'tremble', through pre-Nostratic *t?a-rha, or Bomhard thinks through
> *da/6r-, the facts are that Egyptian <d>, in this case, correponds to PIE
> *t, and Egyptian <3> to PIE *r.
>
> See it now?
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>