Re: [tied] Re: PIE Ablaut

----- Original Message -----
From: "Patrick Ryan" <proto-language@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 11:29 AM
Subject: Re: [tied] Re: PIE Ablaut


>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Miguel Carrasquer Vidal" <mcv@...>
> To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 1:26 AM
> Subject: Re: [tied] Re: PIE Ablaut
>
>
> > On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 23:52:36 -0500, Patrick Ryan wrote:
<snip>

> How do you understand the "Law"? Why not state it for us in the form to
> which you subscribe, including all qualifying exceptions.
>
> ***

***
Patrick:

I am still hoping for an answer to the questions posed in my 10/7 posting,
and a definitive statement from Miguel on what "Brugmann's" Law must have as
qualifications (exceptions) to make it work.

Hopefully, it will explain why PIE *proti- does _not_ show up as OI
<**prá:ti-> but rather as <práti->: we have PIE *o, we have an indubitably
open syllable . . .

***