Re: The O-fix [was: The palatal sham :) ]

From: elmeras2000
Message: 30942
Date: 2004-02-11

--- In, "Piotr Gasiorowski"

> My idea in this case is that the
> *o-infixation is a _phonetic_ process (actual metathesis), not a
> _morphological_ one, which is why the *o is inserted after the
> consonant (rather than replace the original root vowel), giving
rise to a
> schwebeablaut alternation.

That is very close to what I have been saying all along. I regard
the original prefix consonant as a sound like a uvular r which in
most contexts moved into the interior of roots by metathesis, since
r-sounds generally like to come last in initial clusters. I have not
assumed schwebeablaut, for that is not what I have observed, but
perhaps it should be given a better chance? I thank you for the
attention you are according the infix idea.