Re: long, flat, full

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Arnaud Fournet" <fournet.arnaud@...>
wrote:

>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...>
> > > ==========
> > > My point of view about PIE *l is that this "surface"
> > > correspondence covers more than one proto-phoneme.
> > > When PIE *l corresponds with PAA *l as in *pel = full = Arabic
> > > Hafil = Touareg balal,
> > > the expected correspondence in ST should be yod.
>
> Why?
> ============
> Because there are plenty of examples of that correspondence.
> And these two words "full" and "flat" are two instances.
> Arnaud
> =============

But in one of them, the yod you proposed for Proto-ST was nowhere in
the ST examples. That's doesn't validate anything.

> > > For that matter, these ST roots are highly dubious.
> > > Arnaud
> > ==========
> > You can find the real cognates in Starostin :
> OK, so Matisoff is dubious because Starostin isn't?
> ==========
> If you read my mail,
> I do not rely on Starostin's reconstructions.
> I just use the database because it's easy for everyone to look at
> it.
> And Starostin's Chinese is from Yahontov.
> Somebody much more serious and reliable than Matissoff.
> Arnaud
> ===========

Because?

> > And how do you explain that the two by two roots in ST and PIE
> > are so phonologically and semantically similar?
> > Torsten
>
> ===========
>
> Because the root *p_l "full" is a super-cognate,
> PIE + PAA + ST + Yukaghir
> There is nothing to be "explained"
> I can only describe the situation.

I still can't see what it is you are proposing. Is it
1) ST loand the roots from IE?
2) IE loand the roots from ST?
3) ST and IE inherited the roots from a common ancestor?


Torsten