Dear Miguel and Nostraticists:

----- Original Message -----
From: "Miguel Carrasquer Vidal" <mcv@...>
To: <nostratic@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, April 08, 2001 6:13 PM
Subject: Re: [nostratic] quel nostratique £¿


> On Sun, 8 Apr 2001 18:04:39 -0500, "proto-language"
> <proto-language@...> wrote:
>
> >> >[PRp]
> >> >I see no examples that would make us take this proposal seriously.
> >>
> >> *dheh1- ~ Lat. fac-, Grk. the:k-, for instance.
> >
> >[PCR]
> >Is that your only example?
>
> No. And it's not mine. As I said, Martinet and others have written
> extensively about laryngeal hardenings.

[PCR]
Well, if that's all *you* have, then, I would say, the proposition is not sustainable.

> >[PCR]
> >Instrumental -t relates to a very well-distributed formant (Nostratic *-t?a), which usually shows up as -d, and is basically a lative.
> >
> >//Altaic -de/a, locative; Uralic -t (Vogul), locative; Sumerian -da, locative; Japanese de,
> >'at/in/on (the hand of); by means of (through the hand of)'.//
> >
> >to name just a few reflexes.

[MCV]
> You forgot PIE *-od, ablative. The instrumental in *-et (*-eh1) is
> something entirely different.

[PCR]
I believe *-od, ablative, has a different origin.

However, for the record, I do not believe you can make plausible a relationship *et- and *eH(1).

There is another very well-distributed formant (Nostratic *?a) which is a true locative.

Pat

PATRICK C. RYAN | PROTO-LANGUAGE@... (501) 227-9947 * 9115 W. 34th St. Little Rock, AR 72204-4441 USA WEBPAGES: PROTO-LANGUAGE: http://www.geocities.com/proto-language/ and PROTO-RELIGION: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/2803/proto-religion/indexR.html "Veit ec at ec hecc, vindgá meiði a netr allar nío, geiri vndaþr . . . a þeim meiþi, er mangi veit, hvers hann af rótom renn." (Hávamál 138)