From: Arnaud Fournet
Message: 61125
Date: 2008-10-31
----- Original Message -----
From: "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@...>
>
>
> I _can_ choose what I want to include, based on common sense. If I don't
> include OCS pIsU, Eng. dog or Sp. perro, is that dogmatic of me? You
> include <canis>, reconstruct the root as *kuh2on-, and what do you gain?
> One problem remains in Latin (no matter how loudly you shout, this *u
> should not be allowed to disappear; PIE *u does not disappear in the
> zero grade) and plenty of problems arise in several other branches: in
> Greek and Tocharian, *uh2 would have given *wa:, in Indo-Iranian and
> Celtic, long *u:, in Baltic, an acuted long *u:, etc. Your
> reconstruction solves one problem (Lat. /a/ in <canis>) but screws up
> everything else. Please don't ask me to take it seriously.
>
===============
And what is the reason why analogical processes should not have modified the
expected irregular forms into a more regular paradigm ?
I'm still waiting for a clean case of -uH2o- to understand what another
example gives.
Arnaud