Re: [tied] *kW- "?"

On Sat, 17 Sep 2005 15:57:23 +0000, Richard Wordingham
<richard.wordingham@...> wrote:

>--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, mkapovic@... wrote:
>
>> And this later palatalization occurs just accidentally in the 'dog' and
>> 'horse' word among others? Oh come oooon...
>>
>> >The second possibility (and I
>> > just love this one cuz it's so possible and yet so
>> > trippy) is that _part_ of the Anatolian dialect
>> > area lied within the satem area, the part that later
>> > became "Luwian".
>>
>> But you seem to be forgeting that the 'regular' satem-languages (except
>> for Albanian and Armenian in front of front vowels) all show *k = *kW.
>> That's why your theory works with them. But Luwian has not *k = *kW
>(like
>> satem) nor *k' = *k (like centum). That's why your theory does *not*
>work
>> with Luwian.
>
>So the anomalous languages are Albanian, Luwian and Aremenian, all on
>the southern fringe of the satem area, in which the merger *kW > *k
>did not occur immediately.

But Luwian cannot be on the "southern fringe of the satem
area". Geographically, Hittite and Palaic stand in between.
Historicaly, Luwian is descended from Proto-Anatolian, which
split off from PIE long before there was somethinmg like a
satem group. There is no genetic connection, and there is
no areal one.

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