[SPAM] [tied] Re: Latin /a/ after labials, IE *mori

From: alexandru_mg3
Message: 64027
Date: 2009-06-04

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...> wrote:
>
> On 2009-06-04 23:50, alexandru_mg3 wrote:
>
> > My question for you is simple:
> > The Lithuanian verb should be reconstructed or not?
>
> The Lithuanian verb doesn't have to be "reconstructed", being an extant
> word. The question is if we have a right to reconstruct a PIE
> *louhk-eh1-. Where else is such a form attested? In what branches other
> than Baltic do we have reflexes of the root *leuhk-?


Piotr that verb is reconstructed not only by Derksen...:)

I think that you need to send him directly an e-mail and ask him to remove that inherited word ...:)



-----------------------------------------------------------------
> > Because there are 'no traces' of a laryngeal in all the related cognates
> > for them --- the laryngeals are indentified 'by their traces'
> > - h in Hittite
> > - Balto-Slavic accentology
> > - different vocalisations of h1,h2,h3 in different languages
> > - different RH outputs in different contexts & languages
> > (even rH > ar before a vowel in Celtic to give you an example related to
> > our topic)
> > - Brugmann Law in Sanskrit
> > etc...

I think that the circularity is in your head not in mine: because I have already showed your the possible traces above indicating a laryngeal...next I SAID that none of them are present for *mori and *mon- here.
Is this a demonstration? Yes it is!
I repeat it for you :
1. - a laryngeal is present when we have one of the above traces
2. - none of the above traces, is present, so there is no laryngeal
=> as I said the circularity is not in my head....

So for me the resulted reconstructed form is *mori *mon- etc...

Now is your turn....



---------------------------------------------------------

> > You need to show me 'a trace' ....of that one, if you see one...
> >
> > Why you didn't ask me, based on what, there is no -t- in mare, manus?
> > the answer is the same....I 'don't see' any trace
>
> One can prove that there is no medial *-t- in them because a *t would
> not have disappeared leaving no trace un this position. A laryngeal
> could have done just that.
>
> Piotr

Really? And what is that position from where something that 'EXIST HAS DISSAPEARED WITH NO TRACES IN ALL THE LANGUAGES'?

Please post your recontruction here....

Marius