From: tgpedersen
Message: 60597
Date: 2008-10-06
>So the answer is 3). You didn't mention that. Presumable we're talking
>
> ----- 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.
> >>
> >> ============
> >> Because there are plenty of examples of that correspondence.
> >> And these two words "full" and "flat" are two instances.
> >> Arnaud
> >> =============
> >>
> >> 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
> >
> ==========
>
> I've been talking of correspondences and super-cognates.
> The answer is
> 4. ST, PAA, PIE and Yukaghir inherited the roots from a common
> ancestor.
>
> Hoping this time you may get it !?
> I'm ready for a fifth attempt at stating the same.