Re: IS PIE * DERU EXCLUSIVELY INDO-EUROPEAN ?

You have your example of PIE *t(h) = PS *dh in *t(h)aHw- and dhahab.

There is no *b only *p?, and it is the final element of this word. It
naturally becomes PIE*b but because this phone was unwelcome, most
frequently it was modified to *bh though true *bh has a different
predecessor: *p?w; it is probably as a reduction of this that it shows up as
*w occasionally.

As for emphatic, I believe they are related to retroflex articulations in
Indian through Dravidian. The modern Arabic pronunciation is certainly not
glottalized.

There is no reason to assume that the Ethiopian articulation is original.


Patrick

----- Original Message -----
From: "fournet.arnaud" <fournet.arnaud@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 3:00 AM
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: [tied] IS PIE * DERU EXCLUSIVELY INDO-EUROPEAN ?


> > ===============
>
> 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?â?
> 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
> ==================
>
>
>
>
>
>