Re: Satem shift

--- In cybalist@..., "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@...> wrote:

>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: tgpedersen@...
> To: cybalist@...
> Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2001 10:54 AM
> Subject: [tied] Re: Satem shift
>
>
> > I suppose that means they were capable of being re-kentumised

without error (as long as the alternating inflectional paradigms
survived)?

>
> No, because of the irreversible merger of the *K and *KW series.

Even if palatalised *K^'s had been converted back into velar stops,
there would be no way to recover the old contrasts by re-labialising
old *KW's (Germanic, like nearly all other centum-type languages, has
different reflexes of *K/*K^ and *KW).

>
> Piotr

So it hinges on the existence of a stage where this merger hadn't
taken place? Romance, in its "satemisation" also had kW -> k. Does
the relative ocurrence of these two phenomena in Romance tell us
anything of possible temporal sequences of them in the IE
satemisation?
BTW would you care to elucidate on the fate of k and kW in the table
you already made?

Torsten