From: fournet.arnaud
Message: 58400
Date: 2008-05-08
----- Original Message -----
From: "Patrick Ryan" <proto-language@...>
>> >>
>> >> ***
>> >
>> > You are confusing roots and affixes
>> > but never mind.
> ***
>
> Patrick:
>
> From where do you think affixes come? > Affixes begin life as words,
> usually in the simplest form of the root.
>
============
As usual,
a completely unsupported assertion
that describes nothing.
Arnaud
==========
>> > PIE *i "anaphoric pronoun"
>> > seems very close to #V# This is a minimal root of PIE.
>
> ***
>
> Patrick:
>
> The pronoun is *yo: *CV; *i is not a true vowel in PIE since it is
> _always_ the result of avocalic [j].
>
> ***
No,
*i is exhibit both in :
LAtin is ea id
and
LAtin plural Nom domini < domino-i
It's clearly a vowel *-i
*yo is the extended form of *i.
i is a vowel
As usual you are confusing the morphological level where *i and *j are
equivalent,
with the phonological level where *i is a vowel and *j is a consonant.
The same applies to *u and *w.
Arnaud
==========
>> > PIE Dative-locative is -(e)i
>> > there is no H.
>> > As M. Carrasquer-Vidal recently explained it to you.
>> > As usual, you don't listen to what you are said.
>> > I'm not sure what the verb "to go" was
>> > but semantically it obviously cannot have any relationship with a
>> > locative.
>> >
>> > Arnaud
>
> ***
>
> Patrick:
>
> The dative is -*He(i).
> The locative is -*y(e) or *-Ha.
> Miguel explained nothing. He sidestepped the issue.
> The fact is the example he cited was wrong and he refuses to admit it.
> He also refused recently to go into it.
He has explained to you in a long mail with all case forms.
Cf. Message 58368
This message was clear and informative.
As usual, you are unable to read and understand anything.
I'm afraid you can not be saved and are doomed to never make any progress in
this field
as you fail to understand what you are explained
and it's also becoming increasingly clear to me that you lack the most basic
elements in linguistics and phonology.
Arnaud
===========
>
> Your memory fails you.
> We were not talking about locative but about an instrumental.
> Can you never get it right?
>
============
The message 58368 gives all cases.
Try to understand it.
Arnaud
========