Re: Latin -idus as from dH- too

On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 01:30:16 -0000, "alexandru_mg3"
<alexandru_mg3@...> wrote:

>This distinction between h1./h2. and h1/h2 is another 'hocus-pocus'
>of Mrs. Olsen, Miguel =>
>
> 1. the vocalisation of a kind of /x/ in *ph2te'r CANNOT BE ANYTHING
>ELSE BUT /Vx/ (by adding a vowel before it /p&x-t'er/)

You are wrong. Like any other syllabic continuant, it can be
pronounced with a prop-vowel before, a prop-vowel after, or
no prop-vowel at all.

The distinction between vocalized and non-vocalized
layngeals is crucial in other soundlaws as well, like for
instance Hirt's law in Balto-Slavic, where a consonantal
laryngeal causes retraction of the stress, but a vocalized
laryngeal does not.

>Miguel the Laryngeal wasn't vocalized BEFORE or LATER => It was
>vocalized Since It Was in Existence in order that a Human Being to
>arrive to pronounce the syllables of ph2ter > something like /p&x-
>ter/ etc...and that ones of dHugh2ter /dHu-g&x-ter/

Are you implying that the speakers of Bella Coola (Nuxálk)
are not Human Beings?
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nux%C3%A1lk_language).

Or, for that matter, the French ("retard" = [Xta:X]).


=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
miguelc@...