Re: Phonemes

On Sep 9, 10:05 am, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sep 9, 12:49 pm, DKleinecke <dkleine...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sep 9, 5:21 am, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Good stuff - but not relevant to this note.

This is about gemination in Arabic which I suggested is the result of
nasalization.

So, you want a nasal infix that sometimes assimilates and sometimes
doesn't? How do you manage that?

I didn't know I had an already existing nasal infix to deal with. The
hypothetical pre-proto-(or whatever) Semitic nasalization I am
visualizing always, according to my idea, results in gemination of the
following consonant (which is, of course, a form of assimilation).

In Hebrew, it assimilates. In Arabic, it doesn't.

What's your Afroasiatic evidence for pre-Proto-Semitic?

Tentatively I reject Afroasiatic. Re-examine the evidence for Afro-
Asiatic is one of those things on my to-do list I will probably never
get to.

The only non-Semitic Afroasiatic language I have any real familiarity
with is Coptic and I not very impressed by its similarity to Semitic.
I am not really up to speed on proto-Semitic either (mostly because I
haven't properly absorbed the Accadian evidence), So I really have no
idea what time frame I am aiming at. This is all pure speculation and
I am not seeking any converts to the idea.

I am interested in the fact that proto-Indo-European (or at least
Germanic) had a nasal infix very similar to the one I am suggesting.
Nostratic, on the whole, seems just as plausible as Afroasiatic. But
maybe these are all area feature. I have clear opinion.

.