Re: IIr 2nd Palatalisation

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

> Well, let us see how this goes.
>
> ASSUMPTIONS

I would first like some clarifications.

> 5. Dorsal spirants were stopped and velarized: *G > *gW; *x > *kW.
>
> a. Dorsal spirants with former palatal glides were additionally
> palatalized: *GY > *g^w; *xY > *k^w.

Does this 'k^w' have the same meaning as in conventional *ek^wo-
'horse' and *k^won 'dog' or did you mean to introduce a fourth
dorsal series, not discussed below.

> 8. All subsequent modifications of II consonants are independent of

the

> following vowel.
>
> a) An immediately following *y, *i, or *e (from *ai) could,

however,

> palatalize a preceding dorsal.
>
> b) OI g and gw fell together into g; OI k and kw fell together

into k.

Do you mean the following:

(b) Pre-OI *g and *gW merged as *g; pre-OI *k and *kW merged as *k.

(a) Subsequently, these dorsals were palatalised by a following *y,
*i, or *e (i.e. the outcome of conventional PIE *ai, *ei and *oi,
which I (PR) think all derive from PIE *ai).

Have you a view on whether the pre-cursor of Sanskrit /ai/ similarly
palatalised?

Do you believe that what are conventionally recontructed as *gH and
*gHW likewise merged as *gH (*gh in your notation)?

> 9. Late PIE *g remains OI g
> Late PIE *k remains OI k
> Late PIE *g^ or *gy/i/e > OI j
> Late PIE *k^ or *ky/i/e > OI ç

Do you mean the following?
Late PIE *k^ > OI ç
Late PIE *ky/i/e > OI c

> Late PIE gh remains OI gh
> Late PIE kh remains OI kh
> Late PIE g^h or *ghy/i/e > OI h
> Late PIE k^h or *khy/i/e > OI ch

Richard.