From: fournet.arnaud
Message: 55760
Date: 2008-03-23
----- Original Message -----
From: Patrick Ryan
> Semitic t. may be caused by
> the fact the vowel is u.
=============
Starostin databases lack three cognates
of *tup "to (over-)stuff, to fill up"
Arabic t._b_&, t_b_z and t._f_H
Arnaud
============
That, IMHO, is the key to understanding PAA phonology.
In Egyptian, for example, your beloved D is the (probably palatal)
counterpart to <'> which derives from *t?s/ts + u.
==============
Maybe you should be in bed
instead of writing this.
? is from ?
D [t?] I think is not.
Arnaud
===========
Whether a consonant was followed back vowel or not (indifferent to whether
the other member of the set was *a or *i). seems to have been very
important.
========
Only in the case of Pre PAA *u,
I remind you of my system :
PAA *a = PIE *e
PAA *i = PIE *i
PAA *u = PIE *o
Pre-PAA *u > emphatic = PIE *u
Arnaud
===========
For Egyptian, I will first list the *-a/*-i for, then the *-u form:
3--------r
p--------f
d--------t
k--------T
D--------'
H--------x
S--------X
q--------g
z--------s
j--------h
A few make no discernible distinction: b, w, m, n
Patrick
===========
You may have a point for some cases :
Voiced consonants are not emphaticizable in Egyptian.
I believe in :
k --- q
t --- d
s or z --- dj
H --- 3
sh ---- 3
Arnaud
============