- ... [...] ... Don t be ridiculous. ... True, but irrelevant to the silly charge of racism. ... Actually, it *isn t* always written by the winners, thoughMessage 1 of 96 , Feb 29, 2012View SourceAt 7:21:28 AM on Wednesday, February 29, 2012, Tavi wrote:
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Bhrihskwobhloukstroy[...]
> <bhrihstlobhrouzghdhroy@...> wrote:
>> I too consider the tradition PIE model as inadequate. I'dDon't be ridiculous.
>> like to replace it with a model without language
>> replacements and with just one tree, but with a couple of
>> dozens of branch-crossings. So, a very strongly
>> genealogical - but in noway binaristic - model, where
>> there must have existed at least 500 diatopically
>> differents branches of PIE still in PIE phonology from
>> Atlantic to China along 40 millennia. [...]
> I'm afraid your model not only is unrealistic but also a
> RACIST one,
> because language replacement processes have existed allTrue, but irrelevant to the silly charge of racism.
> throught the history of mankind,
> although History is always written (and often alsoActually, it *isn't* always written by the winners, though
> rewritten) by the winners.
certainly this is very, very often the case.
- ... However, they ... spread glottis], so ... languages ... other ... While I still think aspiration is the stop series III is an areal feature of some IEMessage 96 of 96 , Apr 21, 2012View Source
> --- In email@example.com, Piotr Gasiorowski gpiotr@ wrote:While I still think aspiration is the stop series III is an areal feature of some IE languages, and hence not reconstructable for PIE, I've discovered a couple of possible examples of Grassmann's Law in Latin:
> > I'm afraid this is actually a huge misrepresentation, because
> > aspiration is a feature of VOICELESS consonants, not voiced ones. However, they
> > could be treated as "breathy voiced" or "murmured", which in IPA
> > have got a raised [*h\*] (the voiced counterpart of [*h*]).
> Breathy voice patterns phonologically with aspiration in
> Indo-European, especially in Indo-Aryan (Grassmann's Law).
> They are both phonetic manifestations of the distinctive feature [+ spread glottis], so
> there's no need to be pedantic about the distinction.
> > I strongly disagree. Grassmann's Law only applies to those IE languages
> > which have true aspirated stops in series III, so IMHO there's no
> > justification for reconstructing a "voiced aspirated" (or whatever other
> > name you choose) series in PIE.
Latin pinguis < *pºngW-i- < traditional PIE *bhengh-u- 'thick, abundant'
Latin pra:tum < *prex-to- < traditional PIE *bhergh- 'high'