Uralic and IE

[Miguel Carrasquer Vidal]

"Glen Gordon" <glengordon01 at hotmail.com> wrote:

>ME (GLEN):
>  Hypotheses built on hypotheses. There is no **-(n)k in IE.

>MIGUEL:
>  Not sure.  There is in Greek (lynx).

>Come on, Miguel. First, why does it end in -nx instead of **-nk? Are
>y'sure it's not from IE *-nk-s?

Of course it is.  The point is that there are (AFAIK) no
_neuters_ in -nk, which I explain by hypothesizng that absolute
final -nk would have given -r[H2], and a paradigm -rH2/-nk- would
have subsequently been the victim of Ausgleich.

>I've obviously confused everyone a little. First, whether the
>heteroclitic stems end in *-t or *-d changes nothing since I've been
>saying that there was no pronunciation contrasts in IE between *-t and
>*-d (or *-dh).

Which is obviously false.

=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv at wxs.nl
Amsterdam