From: fournet.arnaud
Message: 57355
Date: 2008-04-15
----- Original Message -----
From: "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 3:36 PM
Subject: [Courrier indésirable] Re: [tied] Re: Not "catching the wind " ,
or, what ARE we discussing?
> On 2008-04-15 12:54, fournet.arnaud wrote:
>
>> It was *kuH1on?
>
> The comparative evidence points to *k^won-/*k^un-V-/*k^wn.-C-; the rest
> is guesswork.
=======
Comparative evidence from PAA, eskimo-aleut, PU, ST shows *kuH1on? is not
guess-work.
But you are sealed off into your tower of orthodoxy.
Arnaud
==========
> In your case, it's guesswork plus violations of Ockham's
> principle by introducing (entirely ad hoc) "diacritic" segments whose
> only function is to account for the satem reflexes of *k^.
=============
My ockham's razor is one more step to get rid of useless correspondances.
I keep :
*g^ to be distinguished into *g and *k?
*k^ < *k
*gh
*gh^ (partly phonotactic g+H2)
*kw (the same as k+w)
*gw (idem)
*ghw (idem)
*gh^w (idem)
*kh is *k+H1
*k^w is *k+H1+w
You are on the inflationist side.
I use 30% less velar proto-phonemes than you.
Arnaud
===========
> Why don't you
> go the whole hog and explain _every_ *k^ as *kh1? Shall we have *dekh1m.
> for 'ten' as of today? All you need is plenty of otherwise unmotivated
> *h1's in places where no same linguist has put them before.
> Piotr
==========
This is not what I'm saying but your own caricature.
I gave you four examples of semantically identical roots that display K+H1+w
= k^w.
I will probably find more, because it fits into the picture.
Intensive t+H1 > th (sanscrit)
Intensive p+H1 > ph (germanic fall)
Intensive kH1(w) > k^w
I can explain satem and intensive with the same idea,
Ockham's razor again.
In fact, the zero degree is the major cause of phonological unbalance of IE
languages.
I haven't looked at North caucasic yet, but I'm confident.
Arnaud
============
>> Hence zero grade kH1wn > k^wn.
>> It's a fourth example of kH1w > k^w.
>
> Since when is the zero grade of *CRHVC realised as *CHRC? If anything,
> we have examples of metathesis working in the opposite direction, as the
> structure *CRHC is less marked and easier to syllabify.
> Piotr
========
The structure of *kuH1on- is not *CRHVC
Please explain.
Arnaud
=======