From: Gerry
Message: 8
Date: 2002-12-05
> --- In Nostratica@..., "Gerry" <waluk@...> wrote:of
> > --- In Nostratica@..., "Richard Wordingham"
> > <richard.wordingham@...> wrote:
> > >
> > > I will be looking at roots. I think we've exhausted the issue
> > > affixes, but we shall see. I don't think syntactic parallelshave
> > > been mentioned, except for a very few set phrases, such as 'eyeof
> > theto
> > > day' = 'sun'.
> >
> > Good morning Richard. Top of the morning to you. Have I perhaps
> > given two examples of syntactic parallels?
>
> Parallels to what? Paul Manansala made the point that several
> languages use phrases whose literal meanings are 'eye of the day'
> mean 'sun'. English 'good day' is parallel to French 'bonjour'; IIrish.
> have always assumed that 'top of the morning' has a parallel in
> I'm not sure these really count as syntactic parallels. A betterin
> example of a syntactic parallels is the accusative and infinitive
> both Greek and Latin, which may well not have been inherited.Whoh! You are the one who mentioned "syntactic parallels". I was
> (Proto-Indo-European may not have had an infinitive as we know it!)
>
> It often serves to express the fact that they don't!
> A very common syllable structure is (C)V, but sometimes it is CV,i.e.
> words and syllables don't begin with vowels, but have to start witha
> consonant. I find it hard to take this seriously when the glottalthe
> stop is an allowable consonant, but that I think is my failing.
> Another widespread syllable structure is CV(C), which I think is
> Nostratic syllable structure. It's certainly the typical Altaicand
> Semitic syllable structure. Farsi has a structure CV(CC), whilefor
> Standard Thai has C(C)V(C). Proto-Slavonic seemed to be heading
> (CC)CV, but only got as far as (CCC)VC. Incidentally, '(CC)' is tobe
> read as 'no, 1 or 2 consonants', not as '0 or 2 consonants'.Quick question: can a CV(C) also be represented as (C)V(C)? Any
> this, it gets more complicated. To say that English has a syllableneeds
> structure (CCC)V(CCCC) (e.g. 'strengths') is of limited use; one
> a better idea of what clusters occur. In discussing Indo-European,it
> is very useful to include R for resonant - /l/, /r/, /w/, /y/, /m/,this
> /n/ - in the code. This is a very useful notation, sometimes used
> with R restricted to a smaller set. For example, it is much more
> informative to say that Proto-Slavonic had a syllable structure
> (CCC)V(R) or that Standard Thai has C(R)V(C). For an example of
> notation in action, you could read Witzel's paper 'AutochthonousVedic
> Aryans' ( http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~witzel/EJVS-7-3.htm ),
> where he points how one can identify non-Indo-European words in
> Sanskrit.Wow. Now it gets very confusing. Witzel's paper, BTW, is very
> The code is also very useful in identifying phonetic environmentswhen
> describing sound changes.no
>
> Finally, 'V' is often used to indicate a vowel whose form is
> determined by vowel harmony, or alternatively, in reconstructions,
> longer determinable.Vowel harmony is an optimistic construct. Much more pleasing than