Hi Isaac, On Mon, 23 Apr 2012 00:03:54 -0400, Isaac Fried <[email protected]> wrote: > 1. It is not clear to me how to advance "real evidence" for something > that is manifestly self evident.
What is self-evident to you is not so much to me. A lot of phonetic similarities can be attributed to simple coincidence, especially when what are being compared are sequences of three consonants only. Nevertheless, I'm not completely excluding the possibility of a relationship, just that it needs to be based on more that individual phonetic similarities. What I would regard as "real evidence" is a pattern of correspondences, whereby it could be demonstrated that taw corresponds to qoph in a series of semantically-related roots (not just פתח and פקח), and that heth corresponds to... (what? nothing? a vowel? a [j]?) in a series of roots besides פתה/פתי and פקח. Perhaps it is possible to demonstrate such correspondences on a systematic level, but I at least haven't seen such claims. -- Will Parsons μη φαινεσθαι, αλλ' ειναι. _______________________________________________ b-hebrew mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
