Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Evidence for Nostratic? (was Re: Proto-Uralic?)

From:Rob Haden <magwich78@...>
Date:Thursday, July 10, 2003, 1:16
On Wed, 9 Jul 2003 13:55:40 -0600, Muke Tever <muke@...> wrote:

>From: "Joe" <joe@...> >> So, um, why were laryngeals introduced? Was it the inconsistencies in >> Ablaut, or what? > >Actually, it was (AFAICT) to simplify the ablaut series... > >Where beforehand you have the main series: > > e / o / 0 > >And series with resonants: > > ey / oy / i > ew / ow / u > er / or / r= > >(etc.) > >You also have "long vowel" series: > > e: / o: / @ > a: / o: / @ > o: / o: / @ > >These look weird compared to all the others. >However if you propose that there are sounds there that we're just not
seeing,
>parallel to *y, *w, *r, etc., then you have: > > e1 / o1 / 1= > e2 / o2 / 2= > e3 / o3 / 3= > >...which are perfectly normal members of the series.
I would present the last set, if it is correct, as: áh / ah / h áx / ax / x áxW / axW / xW However, can you cite any examples of the "long vowel series" with a: vs. o: and o: vs. o:? - Rob

Reply

Muke Tever <muke@...>