Re: Mitanni and Matsya

----- Original Message -----
From: "Miguel Carrasquer Vidal" <miguelc@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, April 05, 2008 7:04 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] 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@...


***

Actually, Miguel, I consider this a potential prime example of its abuse.

PIE *wer- could have simply undergone metathesis to Greek <eur-> in order to
maintain semantic integrity.


Patrick

***