Re: open letter to the Google company, on the value of the scientific groups

Franz Gnaedinger wrote:
On Sep 17, 1:40 am, John Atkinson <johna...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
How does Franz know he has trouble pronouncing them? A popular
reconstruction today is H1 = [h] or [?] or [x^] (as in <ich>), H2 as [x]
(as in <ach>), and H3 as [xw]. The first four of these are common in
Franz's putative native language, and the last (labialised velar
fricative) is neither "laryngeal" or "ulvular" or even "guttural"
(whatever that means).

Of course, the linguists who suggest these particular reconstructions
are quick to point out that there is no evidence that this is how these
phonemes were actually pronounced, and that these suggestions are just
likely possibilities, based on what happened to them later.

The overcomplicated and sometimes quite ugly
PIE reconstructions own to a lacking time depth
are one thing, the obligatory laryngeal at the begin
of a PIE word is another thing. I speak of the latter.
My model case is the supreme god of the male
trio of the Göbekli Tepe, namely AAR RAA NOS,

(which you made up)

mind NOS of the one composed of air AAR and
light RAA, seen as male face actually composed
of air and light appearing ex negativo through
the big limestone ring on the Göbekli Tepe,
www.seshat.ch/home/ouranos.JPG
AAR RAA NOS became Harran / Haran
and Ouranos and Varuna and Ra. Now a word
like AAR is not possible in PIE, where it must be
h1AAR or h2AAR or h3AAR or H1AAR or H2AAR
or H3AAR or even H4AAR. The forms Harran
and Varuna testify to laryngeals at the begin
of a word or name composed of several words.
When I claim that Magdalenian is at the base
of PIE, then I am obliged to also explain

No, no one is going to shoot you if you don't pretend to have an explanation for something for which you have no rational basis for an explanation.

how
laryngeals appeared at the begin of a word,
so that no word began with a vowel, and
I gave my explanation in previous messages
here in this thread.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Waradpande seems to have destroyed PIE already
    ... I gave an explanation ... to point out a flaw or an impossibility in my reconstructions. ... they could not point out a violation of a PIE ... "Magdalenian" roots (and they turn out different from the standard PIE ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Construction and reconstructon
    ... But PIE formulas are reconstructions? ... These reconstructions have actually predicted things that have been ... You are welcome to disprove it. ... your starting position in any scientific debate. ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: open letter to the Google company, on the value of the scientific groups
    ... How does Franz know he has trouble pronouncing them? ... PIE reconstructions own to a lacking time depth ... AAR RAA NOS became Harran / Haran ... and Varuna testify to laryngeals at the begin ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: elementary Sanskrit blunder by Harvard professor
    ... PIE can be reconstructed ignoring Iranian and then Iranian explained ... comparing the reconstructions of PII, PIt, PGmc, PBSl, PCltc, and ... You didn't ask what would happen if the Iranian languages were ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: open letter to the Google company, on the value of the scientific groups
    ... Moreover, serious PIE scholars ... So you're basically saying that your 'reconstructions' can't be disproved in principle, and yet you don't understand how that makes them utterly worthless. ... What's important about it is the way that various words in the daughter languages can be traced to an original root through regular changes that also affected the rest of the vocabulary. ... That is, while reconstructing phonemes from previous stages of a language, one may very well end up reconstructing the same phoneme for two modern ones. ...
    (sci.lang)
Quantcast