Re: The monumental stupidity of PIE theorists further illustrated

On Jul 25, 1:43 pm, "ranjit_math...@xxxxxxxxx"
<ranjit_math...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jul 25, 10:40 am, analys...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:





On Jul 24, 11:08 pm, "ranjit_math...@xxxxxxxxx"

<ranjit_math...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jul 24, 9:06 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Jul 24, 6:59 pm, analys...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
But then we also have "erku" of Armenian that is allegedly descended
from PIE "duo".

There's no "allegedly" about it. Haas it ever occurred to you to read
an article about Armenian phonology and learn the evidence for the
change?

Where can one find such an article?

heres something I found on the net

start quote:

*dwo -> *dgo -> *rgo -> *rko -> *rku -> *erku
Changes are:
- delabialization of the /w/ into /g/
- /d/ becomes a flap in front of another stop
- devoicing of /g/
- /o/ -> /u/
- addition of a prosthetic /e/
All sound changes are pefectly admissible and known to have occured in
other
places and times, and they make a natural evolution from *dw to *rk,
however
strange it may appear.

Hamilton bridge in Chennai became Ambattan bridge because of sound
change made by Tamilians.


and thats fortitive!

On the other hand, on a recent trip to Chennai, I found that "flyover"
is pronounced "flavor" by taxi drivers.


Theere two clear fortitions here as I see it:

semivowel w to g

and devoicing of g to k.

Why do you call devoicing fortition?

vowels are weak, vowels are always voiced and therefore ....
.