In spite of the great difference between AA and the rest of Nostratic
in gramatical structure, there is on area where AA and IE seem to be
close to each other and opposed to the rest of Nostratic.

The IE root structure is generally mono-sylabic with the wovel
undergoing qualitative and quantitative ablaut variations.

In AA the roots consist of three consonantal radicals with wovels
between, varying for flection and derivation. According to many
scholars, the three-consonantal root is an extention of an earlier
two-radical root. Thus AA in an erly stage had a root structure very
simular to IE.

This is opposed to the other Nostratic branches where the roots seem
to be disylabic, and ending in a wovel, as far as I have understood.
But perhaps I am mistaking here?

I do not have any clear opinion about the reaon for this, several
possibilities may exist:

Proto-nostratic had mono-sylabic roots. This situation continued in
IE and AA, but in the other branches the root was extended by a

Proto-nostratic had roots ending in wovels. IE and AA lost this
wovel,and developed wovel gradation independently from each other.

IE and AA constitutes a subbranch and this subbranch lost the end
wovels and developed wovel gradation before splitting into IE and AA.

I have some thoughts that maybe are contrary to conventional

- In IE there has been a stage for the development of the quantitive
ablaut, and a stage for the qualitative ablaut. Maybe these stages
are to be placed further back in the Nostratic three-structure, and
maybe there is a strong connection with the wovel gradation in AA?

-I know that tese thoughts are not original. I have seen them written
elsewhere, and then dismissed as nonsense. But, I have never found
any good arguments for dismissing them.