--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...> wrote:
>
> On 2009-06-04 12:20, alexandru_mg3 wrote:
>
> > This clearly show you that this alternance EXISTS.
> >
> > Is this an Schwebeablaut issue, here, Piotr? For sure NOT...
> >
> > So why you have created confusions by invoking it?
>
> The original question was the etymology of <moneo:>. You tried to argue
> that -- contrary to communis opinio -- it comes from *menh2-, the
> alleged by-form of *mneh2-. What you posit here _is_ schwebeablaut in a
> verb root, and worse still, it's precisely the arbitrarily invoked,
> sloppy kind of schwebeablaut that haunted IE studies but was put to rest
> by Raimo Anttila in his book.
> Piotr
Regarding this point :
a) I have showed you first that mo:nere (if from *mon-'eye-) would have been become *mane:re 'to warn' identical with mane:re 'to remain'
so an analogical restauration in order not to create confusion in the head of the listeners IS NORMAL. --> you have put in doubt also thsi evidence ....with no reason.
b) Next at Andrew's remark, I saw 'as him', that we have an extension in -h2 for the root men-, and an ADDITIONAL LARYNGEAL, in mon-'eye- would solve the single exception of Schriver's mo- Model.
NEXT, I have ONLY said that CeRH-/CReH- alternances exists.
b.I. Now at least, I think that is clear for everybody here see gWenh2-/gWneh2-s, that in a similar way, we don't need g^noh3-t- 'to know' to explain 'clan, family' (kno:dai etc..) and the logical semantism g^noh1- is OK: if this, was, at least, a derived formation from an oblique case [g^neh1/g^noh1-] of g^enh1-
b.II. As regarding the Verbal Formation, where I agree that we have a distinct topic, I need first to ask you as 'the Pavel's of Raimo'
(in order not to create again confusions here, as you already did, putting in the same explanation together Schwebeablaut and dieus-formations etc...)
If based on you:
1. 'secondary e-grades' exists or not?
2. if they exists, is the concept of 'secondary e-grade' identical, for you, with that one of 'Schwebeablaut'?
3. if not, based on you, in what consist the difference?
Once you can clarify, this, we can continue on the topic, because otherwise I'm afraid that the confusions will be created at each step.
Marius