From: Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
> As for naca, *spaikul(-ra)- etc. Lehmann gives a full list of such items in Werner Winter's collection _Evidence for Laryngeals_ (1965). They also include hack (: hew), leak/leach (: Lat. lavo), OIcel. skeika (: *skaiwos), OE spic 'fat' (: Gk. pio:n), stack (: *stah2-) and of course ta:cor/zeichur 'wife's brother' and quick.Thanks for the list and the reference, I've never had the chance to
>Lehmann also lists cases of putative laryngeal > Germanic g (*jugunT- 'youth', OE brycg/OHG brucca 'bridge', mucga/mucke 'gnat', Gothic sugil/OE sygel 'sun', and English sow < sugu).I've seen at least "bridge" mentioned in discussions about
>He admits that 'the precise conditions for the two developments have yet to be determined', and yet is bold enough to ascribe the different Germanic reflexes to their derivation from two different laryngeals.Surely *w can yield *g (and *g [through *G] can yield *w, as in
> I'm very sceptical of such explanations. Examples such as *newn > Germanic *newun/*negun > niwun (> *niun)/nigun(i)-), cf. OE nigon, Dutch negen, show that the change *w > *g was possible in Germanic. It may have happened sporadically before Grimm's Law (eventually yielding *k) or more recently, yielding *g. Frisian examples of intervocalic *v (also < *b) turning into g show a still more recent dialectal reenactment of the same process (soogen 'seven', progost 'provost', ju^gel 'gable' < *jiuvul- < *gibula-). Analysing every unexpected velar as a laryngeal reflex without considering simpler alternatives first is paper linguistics.
> Talking of Verschärfung: First, the idea that it always involves *-jH- or *-wH- is by no means generally accepted. To reconstruct 'true' as *drewH- (with an otherwise unmotivated laryngeal)Rasmussen ("Germanic Verschärfung: Tying up loose ends", 1987) adduces
> rather than *drew- only in order to satisfy a preconceived interpretation of Verschärfung, is questionable practice, a.k.a. circular reasoning. Secondly, it is debatable whether it makes sense to talk of an "E & N Germanic change" in this case; Verschärfung seems to have arisen parallelly but independently in Gothic and Scandinavian. There are examples of early Runic forms without it; such forms are also preserved as loans in Finnish (e.g. kuva 'picture' : Gothic skuggva 'mirror'). J.B. Voyles ("Early Germanic Grammar", 1992) regards Gothic Verschärfung and Old Icelandic Verschärfung (the latter split into more stages) as two different changes, and defines them without recourse to laryngeals.=======================