Re: Cardinal and Ordinal Integers

--- In Nostratica@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski
<piotr.gasiorowski@...> wrote:

>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <tgpedersen@...>
> To: <Nostratica@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 10:34 AM
> Subject: [Nostratica] Re: Cardinal and Ordinal Integers
>
>
>
> > Her's another idea. The kW- of the "wheel" word is untypical of
> > the "turn, bend" words I've mentioned in another posting. Suppose

the

> > word was borrowed first in an IA language as *kekl- (> c^akr-),

then

> > borrowed into Western IE as *kWekWl- (cf the Irish "cadraig"

loans:

> > Irish p- corresponding to Latin c- since it was borrowed through
> > Welsh, and "their p is our k").
> >
> > Torsten
>
>
> Any other cases of spontaneous labialisation ("their /c^/ or /k/ is

our /kW/")? You got the Irish example wrong: it was Lat. p- that was
replaced with Irish c-. The analogy does not work. Old Irish had no
native sources of /p-/, but there were inherited /k/-type phonemes in
all the satem languages.

>
> Piotr

You're right, of course. Blunder.
But why should the existence of "previous" /p/'s stop people from
using such an equation? Let me use another example then:
Norwegian 'mote', Da 'mode' "fashion" from French. Norwegian has
plenty inherited -t- 's, but uses -t- here anyway, from the
assumption: "Danish -d- is our -t-".

Torsten