> ===============
Nostratic *p? :
becomes PS *b and PIE *b(h)/w.
> =======
> Hebrew is clear. b is from *b.
> Arnaud
> =============
Hebrew <b> is from PS *b.
So what is the problem?
============
Tsalam? t?ob
The correspondances are :
*w = PIE w = PS *w
*b = PIE w = PS *b
*p? = PIE b = PS *p (? lost)
*p = PIE p = PS *p
PS *b is not from *p?
Arnaud
===============
What a shame !
> Emphatic consonants are glottalized in Ethiopian Semitic.
> Arnaud
> =============
Are you saying Hebrews are Ethiopians?
==========
The general point of view about Ethiopian Semitic
is that glottalized is a conservative feature
which became emphatic in the rest of Semitic.
ARnaud
============
> It is originally a retroflexed apical before a _back vowel_. In
> actuality, the Hebrew has <natan> not <naTan>.
> ==========
Ok
I have checked : it's na-t-an
I thought it was **na-t?-an
as in Arabic &at?รข?
but it's not.
These two words may have no connections
it's really strange.
> Arnaud
> ===========
> Nostratic *t?a corresponds to PS *t.
> =======
If *t? is glottalized,
then this statement is wrong.
Arnaud
> ==============
> Nostratic *tsa/i is the source of PA *dh;
> ========
> Teratological phonology.
> Both *ts and *s become *s in PIE.
> Arnaud
> ============
***
As usual, abysmally wrong! Nostratic *ts becomes PIE *t(h).
***
Could you please provide examples of this ?
Arnaud
==================