Me (gLeN) said:

> 1. There seems to be little or no evidence of the entire
> lateral series, let alone *dl. Why does one insist on
> laterals in Nostratic, other than to maintain a
> dysfunctional status quo?

Danny:
>Then where did all the Semitic (and Chadic too I think) laterals come from?

Good question... Do THEY exist? :) What evidence for those?

>I have to agree with the two-vowel system of early PIE (actually four if you count /i/ and /u/). >I think the mention of NWC is to give a parallel example at least, if not to suggest outside >influence. Bomhard did list a number of (possible) IE-NWC cognates.

Technically speaking, he provided Circassian-IE parallels. Circassian is but one branch of
Abkhaz-Adhyghe. I think some of them might not be correct.

>By the way, by "Indo-Tyrrhenian" do you mean an earlier state of Indo-European
>including Etruscan or Sumerian or any others, or a wider group of families along the lines of >Eurasiatic?

I thought I put a language tree on my site that shows what I mean by "Indo-Tyrrhenian",
"Eurasiatic", etceteradayada. Sumerian is a *Eurasiatic* language but not an
IndoTyrrhenian language.

The IndoTyrrhenian family is simply comprised of the Indo-European branch and the
Tyrrhenian branch (Etruscan, Lemnian and Rhaetic). It is Indo-Tyrrhenian that seems to
first employ a centralized vowel system which I'm convinced is caused by Hattic-NWC
influence between 8500-7000 BCE.

To answer your question: Yes, IndoTyrrhenian is an earlier stage of IE, including Etruscan
(but not Sumerian).

- gLeN

Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.