Re: Evidence for Nostratic? (was Re: Proto-Uralic?)
| From: | John Cowan <cowan@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Thursday, July 10, 2003, 11:43 |
|---|
Andreas Johansson scripsit:
> While nothing about a reconstructed language may be "reliable" an absolute
> sense, but there certainly can be different degrees of reliablity between
> differentparts of a reconstruction. The interpretation of *bh surely is alot
> more reliable than any of the interpretations of *h3.
That depends on whether you read it as b with breathy voice, as
traditionally, or as simply b, as the glottalic theory has it.
--
John Cowan jcowan@reutershealth.com www.reutershealth.com www.ccil.org/~cowan
"You cannot enter here. Go back to the abyss prepared for you! Go back!
Fall into the nothingness that awaits you and your Master. Go!" --Gandalf
Reply