On 2008-02-11 17:35, Patrick Ryan wrote:
> Not to be picky, but should that not be *á: < *éH2?
>
> Is it not supposedly *é before the lengthening and coloring effect of the
> following *H2?
>
> - according to standard theory.
I prefer the "concrete" (surface-true) notation *ah2 to abstract *eh2.
The colouring must have taken place before the loss of the laryngeals
and the compensatory lengthening, since it works in the same way in all
the branches. I believe there is sufficient evidence to reconstruct PIE
*a as an independent phoneme (there is also a minor pattern of vowel
alternations where the strong grade *a: corresponds to the weak grade
*a). At the "systematic phonological" level **e in the vicinity of *h2
fell together with *a, and since this *a was a separate phoneme, the
change **eh2 > *ah2 (and *h2e > *h2a) was phonemic and not merely
allophonic.
Piotr