On Sat, 26 Jun 2004 09:27:06 +0100, P&G
<
petegray@...> wrote:
>>it is
>>an open question whether *H2y- yields /h-/ because *H2 is voiceless,
>>or /z-/ because *H2 is also a somewhat strong sound.
>
>I have a note from somewhere that "there was early coalescence of *(-)h2y-
>into a single segment, with resyllabification:
> *kreuh2-yo- > *kreu.ço- > * kreu.yo- (cf Skt kravya)
>Thus always in initial position, which is why Greek has prothetic vowels
>before *w- but never before *y-."
>
>If true, this would suggest *h2y- > y-
>
Or it would suggest *h2y- > z-. The coalescence of *-yh2-
in the a:-stem ins. sg. (*-oyh2eh1) yields Sanskrit -aya:,
with /o/ > /a/ as in a closed syllable, so the developmnet
seems to have been *-oyh2ah1 > *-oyya: > -aya:. The same
happens in the o-stem/a:-stem GL dual -ayo:s from *-oyyous,
except that the laryngeal there was *h3 (or *h1?)
(*-oy-Hous). The Sanskrit feminine instrumental -aya: is
also seen in Slavic -ojoN and in Armenian -oj^, where
Armenian /3^/ *must* come from *-yy- (*-óyV would have given
Arm. -oy, as in the o-stem Gsg. -o[s]yo > -oy).
If the same rule applied to *(-)h2y- (Jens in his reply
mentions Greek bía: => biázo:), then the development in the
Anlaut would have been:
*y- \
*y- > h-
*h1y- /
*h2y- \
*yy- > *3^- > 3- > zd-
*h3y- /
=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...