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

----- Original Message -----
From: "etherman23" <etherman23@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 09, 2005 8:53 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:
> > >
> > >
> > > > --- 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.
>
> ***
>
In that case we go no further than *es which doesn't have an attested
initial phonemic consonant.

***
Patrick:

Perhaps you know better than most PIEists living today who would reconstruct
*H1es-.

Myself, I opt for *?es-.


***