User:Miskwito/Notes
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[1] (find Elbow Witches)
kahè:ntake ?
For example, looking at the Polynesian family[16] we might come up with the following list
Since a truly systematic correspondence can hardly be accidental, if we can rule out alternative possibilities
To take another example, when we examine the Romance languages, descended from Latin, we find two different correspondence sets which both involve k:
What we do in this situation is try to see if the two sets occur
In this case, we discover that French
we should reconstruct for a proto-phoneme whatever value
For example, in the Algonquian languages, we find the following correspondence set:
if we reconstruct *b then we need to assume five separate changes of *b → m, whereas if we reconstruct *m, we only need to assume a single change of *m → b in one language in the family. Since we are working on the assumption that our reconstructions should require the fewest number of changes possible to arrive at the modern reflexes, we would reconstruct *m here.
In this case, we would have to return to step 4 and reevaluate our earlier conclusions. In this case, we would try to figure out if there is any evidence to suggest that what we earlier reconstructed as *b
that we need to reevaluate the traditional reconstruction of Proto-Indo-European
we can compare grammatical morphemes (word-forming affixes and inflectional endings), patterns of declension and conjugation, and so on.
