[SPAM] [tied] Re: Latin /a/ after labials, IE *mori
- --- In email@example.com, "alexandru_mg3" <alexandru_mg3@...> wrote:
>Another clear example is that one of gWenh2- 'woman, wife'
> --- 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 ....
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?
- --- In email@example.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...> wrote:
>Shall I multiply
> counterexamples? We have *woth2-aje/o- > OLat. voto: > CLat.Piotr, from where you know that we have a -h2- here? ...:)
I hope that you will NOT START TO TELL US THAT -h2- HERE is deduced ONLY based on Latin *woth2-aje/o- > OLat. voto: , isn't it?
Because if so (and unfortunately for you it is so :)) your example is a PURE CIRCULAR ONE:
1. is -h2- so -h2-eye- because we have a Latin -o:/-a:re
and in the same time:
2. it belongs to Latin -o:,-a:re- because is -h2-eye-
So you cannot use this example.