Re: Laryngo delendum est

----- Original Message -----
From: "Patrick Ryan" <proto-language@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2008 4:38 PM
Subject: Re: Re: [tied] RE: Laryngo delendum est


>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "fournet.arnaud" <fournet.arnaud@...>
> To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2008 4:16 PM
> Subject: Re: Re: [tied] RE: Laryngo delendum est
>
>
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Patrick Ryan
> > >
> > > =================
> > >
> > > I think people are tired of explaining you
> > > obvious facts that you don't take into account.
> > >
> > > Even Chinese displays clear and strong
> > > indication that laryngeals in PIE existed
> > > and were kept different until very close
> > > to present day.
> > >
> > > Arnaud
> > >
> > > ============
> >
> > ***
> >
> > And what is your "Chinese" proof?
> >
> > I have been working hard on my new essay, and need a good laugh.
> >
> > Patrick
> >
> > ***
> >
> > Chinese xu4 "raw silk, thread" < *sneH1-
> > Baxter *snjaH
> >
> > Chinese xiu4 "embroider" < *syewH1
> > Baxter *sjuwH
> >
> > Chinese xiu4 "sleeve" < *sluH-(bh)
> > Baxter *zluwH-
> >
> > PIE loanwords with H1 pharyngeal unvoiced
> > causing QuSheng.
> >
> > H2 causes ShangSheng.
> > As in kuH2on "dog" > quan3.
> > Baxter *kuHen
> > Cf. PAA kvHvn "dog"
> >
> > What about your essay ?
> > I need a good laugh too.
> >
> > Arnaud
> >
> > ==============
>
>
> ***
>
> Is this Baxter's theory or yours?
>
> If if you claim it is Baxter's, why does not not notate the *H's
> differently if they have different affects?
>
> Nama is very interesting. It has preserved some of the original meanings
> of my Proto-Language monosyllables almost unchanged.
>
> So, the PIE's taught the Chinese to embroider? How truly incredible!


> Patrick
>