Re[2]: [tied] beyond langauges

At 3:14:53 PM on Saturday, April 26, 2008, mkelkar2003 wrote:

> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Brian M. Scott"
> <BMScott@...> wrote:

>> At 2:46:29 PM on Saturday, April 26, 2008, mkelkar2003
>> wrote:

[...]

>>> If an argument is advanced that aika>eka then they BOTH
>>> cannot be from the same language or even the same family
>>> of langauges.

>> Utter rubbish. By this 'reasoning' Old English <hyll>
>> and its present-day reflex <hill> cannot be from the same
>> family of languages.

> That is not comparable. There is also a geography factor
> here.

They are entirely comparable. Geography has nothing to do
with it. For that matter, <daughter> and <duhitâ> belong to
the same family of languages -- Indo-European -- despite a
much larger geographical separation.

Brian