Re: Re[2]: Horse Sense (was: [tied] Re: Hachmann versus Kossack?)

----- Original Message -----
From: "Patrick Ryan" <proto-language@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, April 13, 2008 1:53 PM
Subject: Re: Re[2]: Horse Sense (was: [tied] Re: Hachmann versus Kossack?)


>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Brian M. Scott" <BMScott@...>
> To: "fournet.arnaud" <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Sunday, April 13, 2008 12:02 PM
> Subject: Re[2]: Horse Sense (was: [tied] Re: Hachmann versus Kossack?)
>
>
> > At 12:17:32 PM on Sunday, April 13, 2008, fournet.arnaud
> > wrote:
> >
> > > From: "etherman23" <etherman23@...>
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > >> k^w, kw, and kW are clearly different. To hear the
> > >> difference between kw and kW just listen to the words
> > >> quick and awkward.
> >
> > > If it were so clearly different, I wonder why people like
> > > Meillet, W. Lehmann, Beekes, Bomhard work with only two
> > > series.
> >
> > Beekes has three. He thinks that the plain series may have
> > developed from the others by allophonic variation but that
> > it was already phonologized in PIE.
> >
> > Szemerényi (§4.7.4.4) has a footnote citing comparatively
> > recent research establishing reflexes of three series in
> > Anatolian, especially Luwian.
> >
> > Brian

> ***


SORRY, ANOTHER CORRECTION

> Beekes and Szemerényi are right. PIE *k(^)W is comparatively related to
> [x].
>
> PIE *k simply maintains comparatively established [k] with the proviso
> that some PIE *k(^) has its origin in *k(^)(h)-.
>
>
> Patrick
>
> ***
>