Re: On the ordering of some PIE rules

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...> wrote:

>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "mkelkar2003" <swatimkelkar@> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > the same time we get rid of the whole Germanic sound shift
> >
> > Does that mean Grimm's law?
> >
> > M. Kelkar
>
> Yes. It means I'm making the clain that those changes that Grimm's law
> is meant to explain were already present as variations (allophones) in

Excellent! That means Verner's law which is meant to explain
exceptions to Grimm's law is gone to. What do you think about the
following?

"Is it not possible that Verner's law of voicing is due to some other
factor-for example the influece of another language on Germanic
"(Thundy 1991, p. 1181, Future of Grimm's Law in the files section.

> pronunciaton in PIE sounds (phonemes), and that those variations were
> generalized in the Germanic languages and the others were gneralized
> in other IE languages, eg Sanskrit.
>
> > > by
> > > replacing it with generalizations of allophones that were already
> > > present in PIE.

Based on the above can PIE be split into two? PWE Proto-West European
from which Germanic, Celtic came out and PVE (Proto Vedic) from which
Balto-Slavic, IIr, Armenian, Greek came out.

M. Kelkar

> > >
>
> Torsten
>