Patrick:
>In my opinion, this table is one of the worst examples of Bomhard's proposals.
Please, Danny, let's ignore this cancer who should have been moderated with long ago. Patrick is trapped in a 19th-century Indo-Semitic dillusion and obviously has trouble being anything other than depressing and abrasive when forming his arguements. Patrick's "syllabicity" pet theory, which is nothing other than a monophonemic vowel system, is not found in any language known to humankind. Even if it were one day, it fails to explain *e/*o ablaut when forming stative/non-stative verb forms in IE. (It doesn't explain the initial subtle difference in semantics between either ablaut form.)
- gLeN