Re: IE thematic presents and the origin of their thematic vowel

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Jens Elmegård Rasmussen <jer@...>
wrote:

> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Rob" <magwich78@...> wrote:
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "elmeras2000" <jer@...> wrote:
> >
> > > > I see. What caused the /e:/ to be lowered and
> centralized
> > > > to /a:/ ~ /&:/ (where '&' = OE <ae>)?
> > >
> > > A change in people's speech fashions.
> >
> > Obviously. Can you try to explain it in phonological terms?
>
> In phonological terms nothing happened: [a:] was just the new
> realization of the phoneme earlier realized as [e:]. Only if a
> new /e:/ emerges does this have phonological consequences.

Perhaps "phonetic" was the word I was looking for. I
thought "phonological" had to do with the articulatory properties of
sounds. However, it seems to me that [e:] could develop into [a:]
through a process of becoming increasingly open: [e:] > [E:] > [&:] >
[a:]. This is close to being a reverse of what happened to Attic-
Ionic Greek /a:/.

> > > > That could very well be the case, and the phonological
> > > > development looks regular there. However, if that happened
> > > > to *bhérx, then why did *mégx not become *me:g?
> > >
> > > Because it was **még^-eH2 that became *még^H2.
> >
> > How was that necessarily the case?
>
> Because the output forms would otherwise have ben different, as you
> said yourself.

I'm sorry, I must not have explained myself sufficiently. What I'm
asking is, why does *mégx have one affix and *bhérx another?

- Rob