Re: long, flat, full

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

>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...>
> >> >
> >> I don't think these words have remained unchanged :
> >> If we look at Chinese :
> >> *pol "full"
> >> 1. Suffix ng : polng
> >> 2. l > yod (a common north Asian change) poyng
> >> 3. voiceless becomes aspirated pHoyng (ST change)
> >> 4. no "throat effect" hence pHoyng1 (Chinese change)
> >> 5. vowel split o > wo (northern Chinese change) pHwoyng1
> >> (Cf. Baxter *ph(r)jong)
> >> 6. labials become f when followed by w foyng1
> >> 7. Modern Mandarin feng1
> >>
> >> What makes you think nothing happened ?
> >
> > So, seven changes in 50,000 years. That's approximately one change
> > each 7000 years. So Chinese hasn't changed in 7000 years?
> > Torsten
> =========
>
> I don't buy your periodizing method.
> There is no reason changes should occur at a metronomic pace.

Well tell me which one you use then. Whichever other 'periodizing'
method you use, the word will have been unchanged at least once for
more the 7000 years.

> This word was already mono-syllabic,
> It changed less than most other words.

Do you have special rules which affect only polysyllabic words?

> What do you mean "au juste" ?

What do you mean by that?


Torsten