Perhaps I do, but I know of no other language that has 7 (or maybe
just 5) roots for the first person pronoun. He also reconstructs 3 2nd
person roots. Plus several deictic and anaphoric pronouns.

What I think might be more believable is that Early PN had 1ps *n- and
possibly a suppletive *?iya. First Afroasiatic, and then Dravidian,
split off. The remaining languages lost *?iya and *n- was displaced by
*p'-, becoming a deictic or anaphoric pronoun.

Incidentally I'm becoming less enamored with the glottalic hypothesis
for both PIE and PN. The *p' that I've proposed was most likely simply
/b/ (I'm working on an overhaul of the PN phonology).

--- In nostratic@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Ryan" <proto-language@...>
wrote:

>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: etherman23<mailto:etherman23@...>
> To: nostratic@yahoogroups.com<mailto:nostratic@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 1:14 AM
> Subject: [nostratic] Nostratic 1st Person Pronoun (Long)
>
>
>
>
> So I've been thinking about the 1ps pronouns in Nostratic, and I'm not
> pleased. There appear to be a dizzying number of pronouns. Bomhard
> reconstructs *mi, *ma, *ka, *Ha, *na (actually there are two of
> these), and *?iya. He tries to explain these variants as suppletive
> forms depending on number, exclusivity, and whether the verb is active
> or stative.
>
> <...>
>
>
>
> Patrick:
>
> Bomhard is essentially correct:
>
>
>
> *mi, conversational partner
>
> *na, one
>
> *na (here, I prefer *nu), collectivity = we (inclusive)
>
> *Ha, here (stative)
>
> *?iya (here, I prefer *yi), speaker
>
>
> *ka (here, I prefer *ki), other
>
>
>
> possibly
>
> *ma, breast, feminine 1st p. (???)
>
> You must dizzy easily.
>
>
>
> ***
>
>
>
> Y
> You must dizzy easily.
> yo
>
> *
>