From: Arnaud Fournet
Message: 60486
Date: 2008-09-29
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian M. Scott" <BMScott@...>
To: "Andrew Jarrette" <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
>
> That IE and PSem. words for '3' are cognates? No. By the
> way,
> <http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:Proto-Semitic_*%C5%9Bal%C4%81%CE%B8->
> gives the PSem. as *s'ala:þ- (*s'laþ-), with a list of
> reflexes; this is significantly different from Arnaud's
> *tel. I've looked very little at Semitic and AA, but
> according to Sáenz-Badillos, *s' is thought to have been
> belted-l (voiceless lateral fricative).
>
> Brian
>
================
Well,
if we first go back to real DATA,
not to what M. X or Y thinks right,
PIE trey "three"
Hebrew sh_l_sh
Arabic th_l_th
From *t_l
I can't see any reason why the first phoneme should be different from the
last.
As a matter of fact, some decipheremeents have been made easier _Because_
this is about the only word in Semitic where C1 = C3.
Next,
Greek tauros
Hebrew shor
Arabic thawr
I consider this word is a borrowing from PIE into Semitic,
the point is the regular result of *t in Semitic.
This *t correspondence has nothing to do with Belted-l
PIE lab "lip"
Semitic sh_f "lip"
=====
Who is this M. Saenz-Badillos ?
Arnaud