From: etherman23
Message: 53899
Date: 2008-02-21
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Ryan" <proto-language@>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etruscan_numerals
> wrote:
> >
> > I consider Manaster Ramer a friend.
> >
> > We had some discussions on his article, and a few of you may be
> interested
> > in some thoughts of my own on the subject:
> >
> >
> > http://geocities.com/proto-language/critique-PKNumerals.htm
>
> Interesting. At one point you mention deriving *dwo: from a dual of an
> unattested **dwo meaning one. The suggestion was made to indicate an
> absurdity and you weren't seriously proposing it. However, what if
> this suggestion is correct? Of course it would be hard to prove
> without an attested form of **dwo for one. But perhaps such an
> attestation exists. Not in PIE, but in Etruscan. The Etruscan number
> one is tHu(n).
>
>
> ***
>
> Sorry, but I am not aware pf thu(n), 'one'.
>
> Where does this come from?