[tied] Re: Short and long vowels

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Ryan" <proto-language@...>
wrote:

Richard:

> Let's see if I can understand what Patrick is trying to convey:
>
> 1) In general, pre-PIE short *e, *a and *o (or some similar trio of
> vowels) merged. However, the distinctions were preserved next to
> laryngeals.
>
> 2) The zero grades from *eH, *aH and *oH were extra-short vowels *e_X,
> *a_X, *o_X. Compensatory lengthening need not have happened here.
> (Incidentally, is plain *eH > e: necessarily PIE? It may be common
> recorded IE, but that is a different matter.)
>
> 3) In Greek, the extra short vowels became normal short vowels.
> Elsewhere they merged to give what used to be seen as PIE *&, which
> merged with *i in Indo-Iranian and with *a elsewhere.
>
> Is Point 2 so incredible?

Patrick:

> Personally, Point 2 does not bother me. It results in much the

same as I have postulated.

What are you postulating phonetically then? Your ideas as you phrase
them are open to ridicule, and I expressed my best understanding of
what you are trying to say. I suppose the laryngeal may have survived
quite late - laryngeals are discernible, for example, in the metre of
the Rgveda.

> But Point 3 strikes me as a step backward. I am trying to explain

_why_ we have specifically <i> in Old Indian.

But Point 3 is the observed outcome. Are you disputing it?

> Merge with /i/, why not with /u/? See my point?

Merger with /i/ is a common enough fate for a schwa - think of the
pronunciation 'sennit' of English _senate_. /u/ is fairly rare except
under the influence of labials.

Miguel made the point earlier that Old Indic vocalic /r/ became /ri/.
That is not universal - other high vowels occur in non-Indic language
that have borrowed words with this vowel - I think the pronunciation
is /ru/ in Tamil, and in Thai the following high vowel is often the
back unrounded vowel.

Richard.