Re: [tied] *es- or *h1es- ?

----- Original Message -----
From: "etherman23" <etherman23@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 09, 2005 12:30 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] *es- or *h1es- ?


> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Ryan" <proto-language@...>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Ryan" <proto-language@...>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > ***
> > > > Patrick:
> > > >
> > > > No PIE root may begin with a vowel.
> > >
> > > That's the standard theory but not a single IE language lacks native
> > > words with initial vowels. Hittite, which generally retains
> > > laryngeals, has no attested laryngeal for PIE *es. The idea that all
> > > PIE words began with a consonant should be tossed in the garbage along
> > > with the theory that all PIE roots are of the form CeC.
> >
> > ***
> > Patrick:
> >
> > The glottal stop is not written in German either but it is very much
> there.
> >
> > Perhaps the signs which we read as VC are actually meant to be read
> > ?VC.
>
> Perhaps, but where's the evidence for it?
>
> > As for *CAC-, show me a PIE root that is not of this form.
>
> I guess that depends on what you mean by *CAC. Is the A your
> terminology for any vowel? Or is A a low vowel?

***
Patrick:

The cuneiform VC signs of Hittite originated in Akkadian where we know from
PAA that various onsets (/?, h, ¿, H/) must have existed.

By *A, I mean the Ablaut-phoneme, appearing in PIE as *e, *o, or *Ø.

***