Re: Re[2]: [tied] Re: On the ordering of some PIE rules

From: fournet.arnaud
Message: 57789
Date: 2008-04-21

----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian M. Scott" <BMScott@...>
>
>>>> Nord-Caucasique zGar(-bi) "hérisson" (-bi est la marque
>>>> du pluriel)
>>>> Ce mot est emprunté dans plusieurs langues :
>>>> - Finno-ougrien *s&jal "hérisson" (< *zaGar) [schwa
>>>> repl .by '&' - JRW]
>>>> - Allemand Igel "hérisson"
>
>>>The latter goes back to PIE *h1eg^hi-.
>
>> I deny any existence to this supposed PIE root.
======
> That's your problem. It has reflexes in Gk., Gmc., and B-S.
> Brian
========

Not just my problem,
A word with limited IE dialectal extension, with obvious connections in
Uralic and Kartvelian, cannot be accepted as a clean PIE root.
This root is clearly tainted with the suspicion it's a LW.

Do you seriously imagine that PIE can be reconstructed in complete ignorance
of what languages are around IE languages ?

Arnaud

========