Re: [tied] *kW- "?"

On Fri, 16 Sep 2005 15:03:23 -0700 (PDT), glen gordon
<glengordon01@...> wrote:

[Mate:]

>> Or not. I still don't get how do you explain Luwian
>> with your theory?
>
>In the same way as anything else. All we are doing is
>changing the "symbol": *k^=>*k, *k=>*q. That's it.

Well, Luwian has *k^ > z (/c/), which suggests a palatal
quality for *k^ in Proto-Anatolian (which is definitely
*not* in the "_post-IE_ satem dialect area").


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