I have made several additions to
http://geocities.com/proto-language/OneLaryngealVocalicTheory.htm
of a minor variety.
In response to my challenge to list-members to critique the Vocalic Theory,
I received two major responses:
1) Miguel chose to interpret my challenge as a call to show what the
standard 'Laryngeal Theory' _could_ explain but the Vocalic Theory could
not.
After several inappropriate examples, he withdrew without final comment from
the discussion. In my opinion, his point was not sustained.
2) Rick chose to misinterpret what Miguel had written, and hectored me for
statements I had not made. His input was a personal attack rather than a
critique, and proved nothing.
I had hoped Piotr or Richard would critique it since I would prefer to be
shown that the Vocalic Theory were wrong rather than have it survive
unexamined.
I extend my challenge to the Nostratic lists. Surely there must be some
dyed-in-the-wool 'laryngealists' who reject my Vocalic Theory absolutely.
Let us hear from you; and why.
In the meantime, I have learned that Bomhard and Manaster-Ramer have adopted
approaches that are similar in some respects to those advocated in the
Vocalic Theory.
I do not wish to "win" by default so touché!
Patrick