Come to think of it, after looking at the
family-level reconstructions, I wonder why Bomhard has only three phonemic
vowels. As you [Pat] said, Dravidian data seems to challenge that theory
and call for a proposal of all six vowels being phonemic.
Remember, Bomhard uses Diakonoff's (?)
Afro-Asiatic which has the one phonemic vowel, a~@, and a reduced consonant
inventory as well, taking out the uvulars. Plus I think he favors
Kartvelian more when it comes to consonantal reconstruction. Still, I
think AB's a little too conservative on his phonemes, while Dolgopolsky is
probably too liberal (he has more sibilants among other consonants
and seven vowels).
I'm probably going to "edit" the roots as
far as I am able.
I'm also confused about the palatized and
labiovelarized velars, plus why does he have only one labiovelarized uvular,
/q'w/. Most cases are justified by the occurence of
palatal-velar-labiovelar stops in Indo-European and Afro-Asiatic.
~DaW~