Re: PIE *a -- a preliminary checklist

The moderators will do what they see fit.
There are written rules but as I've noticed, they're
quite flexible as long as you contribute in an
intelligent manner and don't attempt to cram
superstition or unsubstantiated dogma down people's
throats. There are people on the list who have fringe
ideas but, by and large, they also contribute
intelligent well thought items.
Most of the listers are bright enough to figure out
garbage and usually attack it. I'm sure no one on the
list is always right. If they were, they would be
bored by our attempts to reach the truth.

--- Patrick Ryan <proto-language@...> wrote:

> Jouppe,
>
> do you not think you should be on the list a bit
> longer before suggesting to
> the moderators how to administer it?
>
>
> Patrick
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "jouppe" <jouppe@...>
> To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Monday, February 18, 2008 4:06 PM
> Subject: Re:Re: [tied] PIE *a -- a preliminary
> checklist
>
>
> Richard,
>
> I want to draw your attention as the moderator to
> this opponent
> Arnaud.
>
> It is difficult to overstate how much off-mainstream
> his Proto-Uralic
> is and there is not one proper Uralist around
> (including me) to
> discuss it, because the forum is of course on
> Indo-European.
>
> And Arnaud,
>
> With all due respect. You have obviously invested
> much more of time,
> effort and creativity in reconstructing
> Proto-Sino-Tibeto-Sibero-
> Uralo-Altaic than I could imagine in my wildest
> dreams. You are
> aiming at no less than a total paradigm shift. I
> wish you luck in
> your effort, sincerely. It is not me you need to
> convince, it is the
> scholarly community in that field.
>
> If I may ask: should your great effort not deserve a
> more enlightened
> audience than you may get here among simple
> Indo-Europeanists? It
> deserves at least a dissertation presented at a
> reputable university.
>
> And to Richard again,
>
> Every statement below runs contrary to scholarly
> consensus on Proto-
> Uralic. I will comment them below well knowing that
> Arnaud
> will "refute" me, because I am Finnish.
>
> And lastly wasn't Nostraticism and Eurasiaticism
> forbidden by the
> rules of the forum in the first place? Arnaud has
> stated that he is
> looking for regular sound correspondancies between
> Uralic and Sino-
> Tibetan.
>
> Jouppe
>
> See below:
>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "fournet.arnaud"
> <fournet.arnaud@...> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > I hope I have not been unclear:
> > all Proto-Uralic stems are disyllabic, i/ï-stems
> as well as a/ä-
> stems.
> > Jouppe.
> > ===========
> > No
> > PU had CvC words.
> > like
> > *nol "bow"
> >
> > These words with no final vowel
> > regularly become Cv in Permic.
> > Finnish added -i because it does not allow
> > CvC words.
> >
> > Arnaud
> > =================
>
> - - - - - -
> Scholarly consensus: All PU lexical stems (excludes
> pronouns and
> particles and may be the verb stem used for
> negations) were
> disyllabic.
>
> Possible reconstructions *n´oXlï or rather *n´ïXlï
> (*ï would be a
> close unrounded back vowel, but this one falls short
> of consensus)
>
> And by the way the word does not mean "bow". It
> means "arrow".
>
> Jouppe
> - - - - - -
>
> > '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.
> >
> > Jouppe
> > =================
> > Wrong
> >
> > Summer is "gitso"
> > Nail is "gudmitsho"
> >
> > Arnaud
> > =================
> >
> These two words are unknown to me, but
> 1) final -o is impossible in Uralic
> 2) i and o/u in the same stem violates vowel
> harmony, impossible.
> 3) the latter word is trisyllabic, -tsho is no known
> suffix,
> impossible reconstruction
> 4) the initial consonant **g- seem to claim that PU
> had voiced
> stops, which it had not
> 5) The same goes for **-d- unless it is a fricative
> 6) the cluster **-ts- is unattested in PU, most
> certainly
> phonotactically impossible because Pre-Iranian (as
> attested by
> Nuristani) -ts- was substituted by -ks- in
> Pre-Finnic (*-teksä <
> *detsa 'ten'). I can not come to think of any
> allowed
> cluster /stop+m/ either, and I am too lazy to check
> this from the
> litterature because the reconstructions are not
> worth the effort.
>
> Jouppe
>
>

____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for last minute shopping deals?
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping