Re: Horse Sense (was: [tied] Re: Hachmann versus Kossack?)

At 3:44:52 PM on Saturday, April 12, 2008, Richard
Wordingham wrote:

> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "fournet.arnaud"
> <fournet.arnaud@...> wrote:

>> We have already discussed the fact that hekwos (I don't
>> even bother to put an asterisk on that thing) is not a
>> possible word.

> That is clearly untrue. I don't even recall a serious
> discussion of the plausibility of *h1ek^wos, which is much
> more plausible than *k^wo:n 'dog'.

Arnaud made essentially the same observation back in
September (with the same evidence that he's just mentioned
in response to you) and was rather comprehensively refuted
by Piotr in
<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/49948>.

Brian