Re: The meaning of life: PIE. *gWiH3w-

Yes, this is what I believe also - almost.

PPPIE *Ci, *Ca, *Cu -> PPIE *Cy6, *C6, *Cw6 -> PIE *C^A, *CA, *CA

where *A is the Ablautvokal (*e/*o/*Ø).

PPPIE *Ci:,*Ca:, *Cu: -> PPIE *Cyi:. *Ca:, *Cwu: -> PIE *C^e:, *Ca:, *Co:

Obviously, the circumflex (^) only applies to dorsals.


How does _your_ scheme differ?



Patrick

----- Original Message -----
From: "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2008 3:48 AM
Subject: [tied] Re: The meaning of life: PIE. *gWiH3w-



> > Extra evidence: besides consonant stems, PIE has -i, -u and
> > thematic stems, ie (the latter) stems ending in the thematic
> > vowel. If PPIE was a three-vowel language (i, a, u), we'd have a
> > perfect match.
> >
> >
> > Well, let us take this a step at a time.
> >
> > You are saying PPIE had three vowels, which I interpret to mean
> > that roots had three basic forms: *CiC, *CaC, and *Cuc.
> >
> > Your Ablautvokal in PIE derives from PPIE *a.
> >
> > What happened to *CiC and *CuC?
>
>
> PPIE a -> e, o, zero.
> PPIE i -> i:, i:, i -> ei, ei, i -> ei, oi, i
> PPIE u -> u:, u:, u -> ou, ou, u -> eu, ou, u
>
> The last step was made for systematic reasons, not phonological ones
> (and only partially).
>
> Part of this is from Miguel's lectures (in the archives), but he
> posits long PPIE vowels here, the short ones are use to generate k,
> k^, kW etc (and even corresponding non-velars). The idea that the
> development was the phonologically plausible i: -> ei, u: -> ou
> followed by non-phonological Systemzwang (especially in the
> supposedly Semitic-influenced Germanic) is my own, I believe.
>
>
> Torsten
>
> ***
>
> You are putting your fresh blood into someone else's rotting corpse.
>
> If what you have outlined is true,

Miguel's theory or mine?

> every _short_ PPIE *i and *u should show up as PIE *CíC and *Cúc.
> There are no such roots.
>
> There, the process is fatally flawed.

In Miguel's PPIE > PIE phonology
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/16530
they would go
*CiC-, *CuC- > *C^&C-, *CW&C- > *C^eC-, *CWeC-
or, spelled out
*piC-, *puC- > *p^&C-, *pW&C- >
*p^eC-, *pWeC- > *peC-, *pWeC- > [> id. ,*kWeC-]
*bhiC-, *bhuC- > *bh^&C-, *bhW&C- >
*bh^eC-, *bhWeC- > *bheC-, *bhWeC- [> id. ,*ghWeC-]

*tiC-, *tuC- > *t^&C-, *tW&C- >
*t^eC-, *tWeC- > *teC-, *seC-
*diC-, *duC- > *d^&C-, *dW&C- >
*d^eC-, *dWeC- > *deC-, *deC-
*dhiC-, *dhuC- > *dh^&C-, *dhW&C- >
*dh^eC-, *dhWeC- > *dheC-, *dheC-

*kiC-, *kuC- > *k^&C-, *kW&C- > *k^eC-, *kWeC-
*giC-, *guC- > *g^&C-, *gW&C- > *g^eC-, *gWeC-
*ghiC-, *ghuC- > *gh^&C-, *ghW&C- > *gh^eC-, *ghWeC-


Torsten