Re: Re[4]: [tied] Re: *a/*a: ablaut

No. The lengthening of /e/ in stressed position affects only
Hittite. The other Anatolian languages (Luwian, Lydian,
Lycian, Palaic) have different reflexes of /e/ and /e:/,
e.g. Lydian bira "house" < *pé:r (cannot be from *pér).

===========
Can is the reflex of *pér in that language ?
Arnaud
=============
As the lengthening is clearly secondary, you may of course
ignore it for macro-comparative purposes. Just don't pretend
it doesn't exist.
Miguel
============
I don't appreciate the way you worded this.
I never told or hinted it does not exist.
You are acknowledging it is secondary.
The main problem is
I don't see why your long /e:/ should
not be secondary too.
Arnaud
=================

There is a tendency to ignore, deny the existence of, or
explain away as "innovations" everything in Indo-European
that is irregular or hard to explain. Especially when the
object is to elucidate the connection with other language
families, I think there is little use for such a "(P)PDDIE"
((Pre-)Proto-Dumbed-Down-Indo-European). If you want to
learn about the history of a language or language family,
it's precisely the weird phenomena and the irregularities
that potentially provide the best clues (that is, if you can
make sense of them).
Miguel
=======================
ok
I understand your insult "dumb-down"
as a clear uncomfort on your side
caused by the realization
that your theory is - I'm afraid -
seriously farfetched and useless.
Your condescendance is a little
help when it comes to the real issue.

I will not answer your "dumb-down".
I think there is a clear bias in
many PIE studies to prefer
complex theories to simple ones.
Some kind of snobism I suppose.

Arnaud
===================