IE "Urheimat" and evidence from Uralic linguistics

[Adam Hyllested]

On Tue, 22 Feb 2000, Miguel Carrasquer Vidal wrote:

> Adam Hyllested <adahyl at cphling.dk> wrote:

>> So if the IE suffix isn't
>> analogical, the Indo-Uralic form must be reconstructed as *(n)newmn-.

> But what about the laryngeals?  They can't have sprung out of
> thin air in the Indo-European part of Indo-Uralic.

That was my point (see below).

> is a cognate, we should at least reconstruct something like
> *(H)neGumn-, for some value of H and G.

Not necessarily. What if the phonetic realization of the phoneme cluster
/H1n/ or /@1n/ was *nn-, i.e. syllabic n + consonantal n ?

In my own language (Danish), /@n/ is often pronounced in that way.

Adam Hyllested