Re: The phonetic value of PIE *h3 and the 'drink' root.

--- In cybalist@..., "richardwordingham" <richard.wordingham@...>
wrote:

> --- In cybalist@..., "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
> <Snip>
> > If some PIE verbal or nominal root contains the ablaut vowel
> > [e/o/nothing], and that
> >
> > PIE -peH-/-poH-/-pH- -> -pe:-/-po:-/-b'-
> > (applicable also to other stops of course)
> >
> > does that mean that (verbal or nominal) root would end up as a
> > pradigm with a "mixed" root (-p-t-/-p-d-) which might be levelled
> > either way?
>
> I believe that in this hypothetical context the fuller form would

be

> **peh3t. The most voiced trajectory for the zero grade would have
> been ph3t > bh3t > bt > pt. However, the reduced grade of *pod-
> 'foot' (no laryngeal!) was pd > bd, with bd- > ped- initially.
> Piotr has posted, in
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/2630, examples of
> Sanskrit compounds with a non-initial element 'bd' for foot.
>
> I don't know of any levelling arising from such construction, but I
> wouldn't be surprised to see the arguments (e.g.
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/4674) over Greek
> ogdoos 'eighth' (compared with okto: 'eight') resurface.
>
> Can we still write xW for h3 and claim that 'x' is a substitute for
> gamma as well as chi?
>
> Richard.
>
> ** indicates a reconstruction I don't believe.

You're right, the example makes no sense; my brain must have been in
dual processor mode. The "mixed" root should contain only *-p-/-b-.

The thing I felt needed a mechanism was the otherwise unexplained
dH/t plus the less common d/t (etc for other stops) alternation in
the reconstruction of PIE roots that several basic textbooks mention.
It probably won't be possible to explain them all by "hidden"
laryngeals sloshing around in the root, but maybe some? I've tried
myself to unify *tan- (Tanais) and *dan- (<- dHeh2n, note the
laryngeal) "Dane", by a similar strategem.

Torsten