Re: PIE Soundchanges - Grassman & Bartholomae

-----Original Message-----
>From: Roger Mills <rfmilly@...>
>
>Paul Bennett wrote:
>> I know there's some controversy about how exactly Grassman's and
>> Barthlomae's laws took place, but I'm working on Thagojian 2.0, and I
>> *think* I've come up with a way to succinctly express a wild stab at
>> something approaching them. How does this look...?
>>
>> Ch > C / ChV? _ s
>> Ch > C / _ VCh
>> (C)h(C) > ($1)($2)h
>>
>> Actually, Henrik: are rules like that third one allowed in SCH files? More
>> to the point, given the syllable-based approach of SCH, is a rule like
>> that even easily to implement across syllable borders?
>>
>Can't answer that question; But is #3 an IE rule, or just a Sanskrit or
>Indo-Aryan rule??
Rules 1 and 2 appear apparently independently in Greek and Indo-Iranian (and
Thagojian 2.0). Rule 3 appears in Indo-Iranian (rather than Indo-Aryan, I
think), and Thagojian 2.0

I thought of another way to write #3, too:

hC > Ch / C _

This might be easier for SCH to compile, I really don't know. The same question
stands about changes applied across syllable boundaries.

Other rules that occur in Thagojian 2.0 are:

R > uR / Cw _ C
R > uR / V[+round].*C _ C
R > iR / C _ C
^ > / _ h?s
k^, g^, g^h > s and S depending on several rules
s > S / r,u,k,g,gh,i _
kw > p / _ i,e
kw > k (elsewhere)
(likewise for gw and gwh > b and bh)

I ought to post my "raw" notes for you guys to pick and/or tear apart, actually.
I may do that when I get home, but I'm already into v2.1 on the nominal
inflection, since 2.0 relied on a *very* incomplete understanding of the
various hystero- and proterodynamic stems, and static stems. I kinda want to
get that more or less solid before I start posting anything.





Paul