Re: Greek kitharis

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "david_russell_watson" <liberty@...>
wrote:

>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "stlatos" <stlatos@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "david_russell_watson" <liberty@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "stlatos" <stlatos@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > All known languages not currently classified as IE are
> > > > actually from one branch of IE: Indo-Iranian.
> > >
> > > What?!
> >
> > I did indeed mean it. I don't expect to have it believed
> > based on my word alone, but I explained myself in answer to
> > the questions I faced. If you prefer to talk about only the
> > rest of my message, that's fine.
>
> No. With this confirmation that there was no typo and that
> you truly meant what you posted, I'm afraid that we're done.

The reason I looked in Indo-Iranian for the source of the borrowing
doesn't negate the ev. for it even if you disagree. The changes in
PIE *kantlom > *ky~tHry~ > *kytHar are perfectly normal and
well-attested, having nothing to do with my broader theory. You said:

> > > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "david_russell_watson" <liberty@>
> > > wrote:

> > now more than ever your
> > supposed *ky~tHry~ seems to have fallen out of a clear
> > blue sky.

and

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "stlatos" <stlatos@...> wrote:
>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "david_russell_watson" <liberty@>
> wrote:> > Yes, but with no other evidence at all for a Proto-I.-Ir.
> > *ky~tHry~,
>
> I never said Proto-I-Ir; the unknown language was compared to
> Nuristani and Khowar.

So it seemed you wanted clarification or misunderstood what I said
about *ky~tHry~. I gave as much information about why I looked in
In-Ir for its source, which languages had the necessary changes, and
in what direction borrowing occurred as I could. If you disagree with
one part of my theory, given in response to your questioning, are you
going to ignore all the ev. for the chain?