Re: PIE *a -- a preliminary checklist

I write in text:
Jouppe

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

>
>
> jyvä from yewos is a perfect example of a plain stem borrowing.
> Jouppe
>
> ================
>
> I don't understand this statement.
> Uralic languages borrowed a two-syllable word *yewo.
> Which regularly became jyvä in Finnish.
> *jewo > juwo > juwa > jüvä written jyvä
> Arnaud

- - - - -
I hope I have not been unclear: all Proto-Uralic stems are
disyllabic, i/ï-stems as well as a/ä-stems. Any other second syllable
in a loan original has as a rule and in the oldest times been
mutilated to the plain stem vowel, i/ï is even more common but a/ä is
part of the same logic. Anything added to these stems would have been
perceived as suffixes.

'jüvä-' is a plain PU stem. There has never been *jevo- which would
violate two absloute phonotactic rules in PU: no word stem ends in -o
and *e never occurs with a back vowel.

**je- was from the beginning front vowel, what is the reason you want
to presuppose back-vowel intermediate stages? **je- easily became jü-
directly. *je would not have been substituted by **ja- or **jo- as
long as there was closer *jü-.

Jouppe
- - - - -

> =================
> Counter examples appeared in the language gradually, Proto-Finnic
> already happily borrowed suffixes. The tendency was gradual.
> Jouppe
> =======
>
> See above example.
> Arnaud
> =============
>
> Tapani Salminen is not Hungarian, not that I necessarily need to
> agree completely with his writings, but the family tree is very
> controversial, in many branches. The Finno-Volgaic node may already
> be declared dead. Mari is just as different as Permian.
>
> Jouppe
> =============
>
> No
> It's made controversial by some people
> who maybe have nothing else to say.
>
> The Finno-Volgaic node is valid.
> with MAri being close to Mordvin.
>
> Permic is very different.
> And it has retained voiced PU consonants
> A very strong isogloss.
>
> Arnaud
>
> ==================
>