Fw: *G^EN-

[proto-language]

Dear Stanley and IEists:

----- Original Message -----
From: "Stanley Friesen" <sarima at friesen.net>
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 1:26 AM

[SF]

> Some, certainly,  All I said was that it is not a *rule* that all roots
> must be CVC, and thus not all CVC(V)C forms are extended roots.

[PCR]

And, asking you the same question, I thought I asked Peter: what are a few
examples of IE roots which cannot be referred to CVC bases?

<snip>

> Now, for the latter I would normally require extensions with different
> places of articulation.  I consider that much of the variation of the -k~-g
> sort is due to inter-dialect borrowing, not to originally different
> (extended) roots.  That is, root final consonants that differ only in
> voicing or aspiration, and are associated with virtually identical meanings
> are probably best treated as being post-PIE variants of one form.

[PCR]

I have never read this before, and am sceptical. How about a few examples?

>> [SFp]

>>> I find it better to just take PIE roots as they come, without trying to
>>> force them into some preconceived mold.

>> [PCRp]

>> You assume what you attempt to argue.

>> It is the form of a PIE root which is the question  here.

[SF]

> I meant that I would reconstruct only those root forms that are multiply
> attested, at least for PIE.  (The issue of an earlier stage is a separate
> matter).

[PCR]

What might some examples be?

Pat

PATRICK C. RYAN | PROTO-LANGUAGE at email.msn.com (501) 227-9947 * 9115 W. 34th
St. Little Rock, AR 72204-4441 USA WEBPAGES: PROTO-LANGUAGE:
http://www.geocities.com/proto-language/ and PROTO-RELIGION:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/2803/proto-religion/indexR.html "Veit ec
at ec hecc, vindgá meiði a netr allar nío, geiri vndaþr . . . a þeim
meiþi, er mangi veit, hvers hann af rótom renn." (Hávamál 138)