----- Original Message -----
From: "John Cowan" <jcowan@...>
To: <CONLANG@...>
Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 8:12 PM
Subject: Re: "Wife" (was: Homosexuality etc.)
> Pavel Iosad scripsit:
>
> > Is it really *_kwen_? I mean, I'd rather expect *_gwen_ in the
> > traditional reconstruction, based also on Slavic *_z^ena_ rather than
> > *_c^ena_, or OIr _ben_ rather than *_cen_ or whatever.
>
> Absolutely: g_wen it is: OIr ben, ModPers zan. Gk gyne is from the
zero-grade
> version.
And PIE k_w goes to PG h_w/x_w.
> > See, it's not even OT :-)
>
> Nothing about proto-language reconstruction can be OT, reconstructions
> being by nature conlangs. (Except, of course, reconstruction _advocacy_.
> "PIE rules, PAN drools!" Etc.)
>
> --
> John Cowan jcowan@reutershealth.com www.ccil.org/~cowan
www.reutershealth.com
> "If I have seen farther than others, it is because I was standing on
> the shoulders of giants."
> --Isaac Newton
>