From: stlatos
Message: 67972
Date: 2011-08-07
>That is not true. I gave plenty of ev. in favor of my theory and against yours; far more than you provided for it.
> At 1:00:07 AM on Monday, August 1, 2011, stlatos wrote:
>
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Brian M. Scott"
> > <bm.brian@> wrote:
>
> >> At 9:36:17 PM on Sunday, July 31, 2011, stlatos wrote:
>
> >> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "cafaristeir"
> >> > <cafaristeir@> wrote:
>
> >> >> I know that the IE active participle of present and
> >> >> aorist is in -nt, while the perfect has -wos/-us.
> >> >> Likewise, the passive participle of present and aorist is
> >> >> in -mH1no-
>
> >> > There's no ev. for -H1- or any other H here.
>
> >> To quote Ringe:
>
> > It is now clear that the PIE mediopassive participle
> > suffix was *-mh1nó-, since that is the only shape that can
> > account both for Gk -μενο- (/-meno-/) and Tocharian B
> > -mane, A -mÄá¹ (Klingenschmitt 1975: 161-3).
>
> >> Whether or not everyone agrees that it's persuasive, there
> >> clearly *is* evidence.
>
> > This is yet another argument over semantics. I do not call
> > data ev. just because it could be interpreted in one way;
> > only when it does so well (has no better alternative,
> > can't be accounted for by analogy or contamination, etc.).
>
> You haven't actually addressed the assertion that *-mh1nó-
> is 'the only shape ...' and whatever arguments suppor it;
> you've merely asserted a contrary opinion. And after what
> I've seen of your opinions, methodology, and judgement over
> the years, I've little reason to take any of them seriously.
>