The time depth we are talking about when comparing uralic and indo-
european is so great that it is meaningless to try to find exact
correspondances between such sub-phonemic elements as labialisation,
aspiration, glottalisation, etc. Such elements can ossilate back and
forth many times during this time span. What can be done, I think, is
to see if elements in two words have common phonetic traits.
According to my opinion "kVw" and "p" could very well be related, If
you go back to a period before common IU and common UR. For example
could the uralic form result from the development kVw>kw>pp>p.
And with the H/S^: The change from s/S^ to h is so common that it
could have happened also in periods before common IU and common UR.
Then s could have been the original, and it could have changed into h
in IU.
And what actually is the difference between a labiovelar and the
sequence kW? In either case, the sequence kw could very easily
develope into a labiovelar.
--- In cybalist@..., Miguel Carrasquer Vidal <mcv@...> wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Oct 2001 09:45:03 -0800 (PST), Knut Holt
> <aquila_grande@...> wrote:
> Even if G & I were right, and (pre-)PIE
had *s^ek^wos, then it would still be problematical to relate that to
Finn. *s^epo-, because of *k^w ~ *p (the PIE form does _not_ have a
labiovelar *kW, but a cluster *k^ + *w, which suggests earlier **kVw).