Re: Mitanni and Matsya

On Sat, 5 Apr 2008 18:28:21 -0500, "Patrick Ryan"
<proto-language@...> wrote:

>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@...>
>To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
>Sent: Saturday, April 05, 2008 5:25 PM
>Subject: Re: [tied] Re: Mitanni and Matsya
>
>
>> On 2008-04-06 00:15, Miguel Carrasquer Vidal wrote:
>>
>> > If the traditional explanation is correct (metathesis of
>> > *weru- > ewru-), we don't need an initial laryngeal here.
>> > But what kind of form is *werú-? Can it be from *wrHú-? I
>> > would expect *(F)arú- or *hurú-...
>>
>> That's why I suggest *wérh1os > *h1érwos > eûros (affecting the
>> adjective by analogy). The same may have happened in the higher grades
>> of the adjective, with regular full vocalism in the root.
>>
>> Piotr
>
>***
>
>This is why I started looking for alternatives to the standard 'laryngeal'
>theory.
>
>Whenever there is an anomaly, someone proposes a 'laryngeal' to solve it.
>
>It seems almost too convenient.

As Piotr has just shown, there's no need to look for
alternatives to the laryngeal theory when confronted with
occasional and inevitable 'abuses' of it. The anomaly can
also be explained by different means, and you still get to
keep the countless accomplishments of laryngeal theory.

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