--- In email@example.com
, "alexandru_mg3" <alexandru_mg3@...> wrote:
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@> wrote:
> > On 2009-06-04 10:07, alexandru_mg3 wrote:
> > > P.S. And I will come next to this supposed 'impossibility' CERH/CREH and
> > > I will show you a flexion pattern of the same word showing this alternance.
> > Do read Anttila first, or you'll be reinventing the wheel.
> > Piotr
> Yes I read him, but it was you that created confusions here, putting in discussion (by intention) the Schwebeablaut ...
> Maybe you can explain dieus- forms again for everybody here regarding the vowel position inside ---> and to tell to everybody here that there is no Schwebeablaut issue regarding such forms
> BUT we have the vowel -e- IN TWO DIFFERENT PLACES
> Again the 'general' mixture with Schwebeablaut was put in equation by you, by intention, in place to explain concretely each form ....
Another clear example is that one of gWenh2- 'woman, wife'
The Nominative and Accusative forms show gWénh2-
But the Obliques Forms show gWnéh2- :
So the accentual pattern is CeRH- in Nominative and CReH- for Genitive/Dative
This clearly show you that this alternance EXISTS.
Is this an Schwebeablaut issue, here, Piotr? For sure NOT...
So why you have created confusions by invoking it?