Re: Laryngeal Reduction - Rule-1: -CHCC- > -CCC-

Arnaud, reading comprehension should be mastered before an attempt to
understand linguistics.

I did _not_ write "nihilist"; I wrote "nilist", a reference to your peculiar
"nil-grade" terminology instead of the standard 'zero-grade'.

Is the degree sign ( ° ) used in France (if nowhere else) for something
phonological in PIE?

You say below you hold very little of what I write to be "worthy".

I only wish I could be so complimentary.


Patrick

----- Original Message -----
From: "fournet.arnaud" <fournet.arnaud@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 4:23 PM
Subject: Re: Re: Re: [tied] Laryngeal Reduction - Rule-1: -CHCC- > -CCC-


>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Patrick Ryan
> > >
> > =============
> The zero-grade, for anyone but our resident nilist, of *dhe(:)H- is *dh&-.
>
> =======
> I have too many core beliefs
> to ever consider becoming nihilist
> or cultural relativist.
>
> My phonological point of view is :
> e grade : dheH1
> o grade : dhoH1
> unstressed e : dh°H1
> zero grade : dhH1 > -t-
> For PIE stage.
> Unstressed and zero grade
> is not the same
> (as proved long ago
> by Kurylowicz)
>
> Reinterpretation of dh°H1 or -t-
> as dhe is Greek not PIE.
>
> I think some confusion arises
> when people project on the
> screen of PIE (unduly project)
> morphological systems (like Greek)
> that display innovative features.
>
> I consider that
> Greek zero grade *the (short)
> is a late Greek analogical
> back-formation from the: (long)
> Rewrite Greek the as *dhH1
> and project that thing in PIE
> I hold this maneuver as *flawed*
> and illegitimate.
> Greek tends to apply
> long/ short to any vowel.
>
> Arnaud
> ==========
>
> As for -dh- and -d-, why do you not prove Pokorny wrong, Arnaud? So easy
> for
> you since everyone else is wrong a priori.
> Patrick
> =============
> I don't think everyone else is wrong
> otherwise I would not need or request
> being here.
> And there is no real discussion
> if everybody thinks the same
> this is a forum not a sect.
>
> When it comes to you, especially,
> you are right to think that very little of
> whatever you write, I hold as worthy.
> But it's a statement about *you*
> and you are not *everyone* else.
>
> I don't think Pokorny is "wrong",
> it's outdated and very often
> I consider that the "roots"
> are not sorted out in the
> most adequate fashion.
> But it remains useful.
> To be Handled with care.
>
> Arnaud
> =============
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>