Re: [tied] A loose thought on present n-infix, ablaut

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:

>
> On Sun, 25 Jun 2006 15:05:11 +0000, tgpedersen
> <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
>
> >Now, I have a vague recollection that Miguel did something similar
> >here on cybalist with a's and aN's recently, which impressed me much
> >but I didn't understand half of, and a nagging doubt that it was
> >something similar to the above, but I can't find a reference.
>
> It wasn't anything similar. I'm not sure what you're
> referring to, perhaps something I said about the alternation
> *gWem- ~ *gWah2- and similar ones. If I remember correctly,
> I tried to explain it as **gWamh2-V- (syllabificatioon
> *gWa-mh2a-) > *gWem- versus **gWa:mh2-C- > **gwãh2-C- >
> *gWah2- (with etymological /a/, not /e/, before *h2).
>

Don't be bashful ;-) At least the trick was the same, if not the field
of application.

BTW I can't access my copy of Trask; do you recall whether there is
other evidence (eg. internal) of the Basque *b- > m-, other than the
supposed loans from Latin?


Torsten