Re: Re[4]: [tied] Re: Not "catching the wind " , or, what ARE we

----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian M. Scott" <BMScott@...>
To: "Patrick Ryan" <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 11:39 AM
Subject: Re[4]: [tied] Re: Not "catching the wind " , or, what ARE we
discussing?


> At 8:38:41 AM on Tuesday, April 15, 2008, Patrick Ryan
> wrote:
>
> > From: "fournet.arnaud" <fournet.arnaud@...>
>
> [...]
>
> >> It was *kuH1on?
>
> >> Hence zero grade kH1wn > k^wn.
> >> It's a fourth example of kH1w > k^w.
>
> [...]
>
> > There is no 'laryngeal' in this word.
>
> > It is analyzed as *k^e-, 'gray' + -w-, 'wolf/predator' +
> > -n- 'thing'.
>
> No, it isn't. *You* so analyze it. Since your etymologies
> are ... ideosyncratic, the distinction is important.
>
> Brian


***

Patrick:

Brian, *you* are absolutely correct.


***