Re: Greek psephas/knephas/dnophos/zophos: linked?

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Torsten" <tgpedersen@...> wrote:

>
> The fact that a word appears in Altaic or Kartvelian does not mean

that they appear in some 'paleo-IE' dialect.

>

This is because you stick to the traditional PIE model, which is both
incomplete (it doesn't explain all the IE facts) and isolacionst.

> > What I meant is denasalization isn't so uncommon as you might think.
>
> Yes, that is exactly what you said, so the above is not an explanation

of what you said. However what I said was that it was uncommon in IE.
The fact that it's common elsewhere is irrelevant.

>

No, there's no "elsewhere" because this is IE. And comparative evidence
shows denasalization did happen in one of the paleo-dialects which make
up the IE family.

> The supposed singular n- -> d- of Lithuanian debesìs is explained

much better by the assumption of an original cluster *dhn- vel sim in
the "fog" word.

>

I disagree.

> And darkness is darkness. You are the new Heidegger.
>

How would you explain a color to a born blind person?