From: Patrick Ryan
Message: 41947
Date: 2005-11-09
----- Original Message -----
From: "david_russell_watson" <liberty@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2005 10:22 PM
Subject: [tied] Re: PIE voiceless aspirates
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Ryan" <proto-language@...>
> wrote:
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "glen gordon" <glengordon01@...>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > Since *woidos becomes /veda/ (the thing that you're
> > > currently lacking) this absolute assertion is
> > > obviously not correct.
> >
> > By the way, what form is *woidos? third imperfect?
>
> He said that it's "the THING that you're lacking" and so
> obviously intended a noun. With *woidos he clearly intends
> the P.I.E. preform of Sanskrit 'vedah'.
>
> David
***
Patrick:
I knew that, David.
I was simply trying to call attention to the fact that he left off the
visarga and also left out any indication of length for the vowel.
In addition, he had tried to make the ignorant point in an earlier posting
that somehow the existence of *woid- was proved by *ved-" (sic!) after I had
stated that, in my opinion, Old Indian had only <a> (from PIE *e and *o); he
obviously did not now that PIE *e/a/o + *i all show up as Old Indian <e:>.
Pokorny, of course, has only *weido-s. Do you believe the pre-form of
<ve:da-H> had to be *woido-s?
***