Re: [tied] Timing of ablaut

You are arguing past each other. [u] is indeed a lighter vowel than [o],
but that is by virtue of being high, for in high vowels the buccal opening
is smaller than in vowels of medium aperture. [e] is lighter than [o]
because of the lack of rounding and backing, both of which features tend
to increase the active part of the buccal cavity. If of the vowels
concerned [o] is not *very* close, and [a] is not *very* open, then the
[o] which is meant may easily be a fuller vowel than the kind of [a] that
is meant. That explains Brugmann's law, and it also explains the
lengthening of original /o/ in Hittite where it operates only under the
accent and then also in syllables (thus Melchert).

Jens

On Sat, 27 Sep 2003, Glen Gordon wrote:

>
> Miguel:
> >Then why is Skt. /u/ not lengthened in an open syllable?
>
> But *u is treated differently morphologically than *o. It is *e
> and *o that are used in verbal ablaut, not *u. Both *u
> and *o might have the same length but not the same
> weight, so to speak, since *u is a zerograde diphthong
> while *o is not.
>
>
> = gLeN
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> ADVERTISEMENT
> click here
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>