From: fournet.arnaud
Message: 57509
Date: 2008-04-17
----- Original Message -----
From: "fournet.arnaud" <fournet.arnaud@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 9:05 PM
Subject: Re: Re: Re: [tied] Re: Not "catching the wind " , or, what ARE we
discussing?
>
>>> I believe PIE inherited or created two words for "dog = biter" :
>>> *kuH1-on? (mobile stress)
>>> *kuH1-nto- (final stress)
>>>
>>> Arnaud
>>> ================
>> Patrick:
>>
>> Why in the world would you "think" (you mean 'guess') that 'dog' derives
>> from a PIE root meaning 'bite'?
> ==========
> Other words for "dog" are "barker", "yeller", "walker".
> Arnaud
> ============
>>
>> There is no PIE root meaning 'bite' of the form *ku:-!!!!!!!
> =========
> You are just so grossly incompetent.
> Pokorny p. 640-641
> *k^we:m "to eat, to swallow".
> AI ca:mati
> G.c *kwe:m-
> *ku_H1-m
> Arnaud
> =========
>> And if we were to assume that Proto-Eskimo-Aleut (already suspicious
>> because it is a reconstruction)
> =========
> It's not something you invented
> so it's trustworthy.
> Fortescue is well-known on PEA.
> Arnaud
> ========
>> In short, you are ignorant of the most basic procedures of linguistics.
>> > Get an education, and comeback in 20 years.
>>
> =======
> Why don't you live up to your own advice ?
> Arnaud
> ==========
>
>