From: Grzegorz Jagodzinski
> --- In email@example.com, "Grzegorz Jagodzinski"Ooops, for to be more correct, not exactly. Hebrew has four, not three
> <grzegorj2000@...> wrote:
>>> He's right about these instances of *a, yes, but
>>> I think he might be going too far in some cases
>>> like *was-. I don't think it truly was **wHs- at
>>> the very last stage of IE. Vocalization of laryngeals
>>> in these positions would have occured early on.
>> Why? Notice that *H used to yield a vowel (E, call it "schwa" or
>> what you like) easily, anyway more easily than *r or *l. And wlC-
>> yielded wl.C-, not *ulC-, didn't it? So, why wHC- mightn't have
>> yielded wEC-?
> There is at least one other language that I know of (Biblical Hebrew)
> that had phonetic schwas (indeed, the word "schwa" comes from Hebrew)
> articulated next to laryngeals. Furthermore, Biblical Hebrew had
> three different "colors" of schwas: a-colored, e-colored, and o-
> At least one descendant of IE, Greek, had the same thing.And this merging was before or after loss of laryngeals? Of course that
> My take on the matter is that "syllabic laryngeals" were never really
> syllabic, but had a schwa(-like) vowel coarticulated with them when
> they were in zero-grade position. For example, *pxté:r 'father' was
> likely pronounced [p@...:r]. In every IE language, this schwa merged
> with some other vowel phoneme -- /a/ in most descendants, /i/ in Indo-
> Iranian, and /e/, /a/, or /o/ in Greek, depending on the laryngeal
> Concerning wHC-, then, there is nothing to prohibit such a sequence"ai. dehnstufig va?stu- n. `Stätte, Haus', jünger va?stu- n. `Ding, Sache' "
> in IE. However, the Greek word _(w)ástu_ 'town' and Vedic
> _vástu_ '[ibid.]' both show a form with two zero-grade syllables.
> That's why I think it was unlikely to have been of native IE origin.