Re: Verdict on Mann

On 2008-12-01 23:41, Andrew Jarrette wrote:

> Thank you for replying (and especially if you actually did all the
> counting!). So you're probably still of the opinion that IE didn't
> really have distinct palatal and velar series (I know that at one
> point in past messages you have said that you believe they may have
> been distinct, but were velars vs. uvulars, not palatals vs. velars --
> do you still think this is the most probable scenario for PIE?).

I prefer to keep an open mind as regards the phonetic details. I believe
it's likely that *k was a uvular and *k^ a plain velar at least at some
pre-PIE stage. However, even in PIE itself, the *k-series dorsals seem
to have triggered a-colouring quite frequently, as if they had patterned
with *h2. This happened even to the final vowel of thematic stems when
extended with the suffix *-ko- (note the absence of Brugmann's Law in
Skt. -a-ka-, pointing to *-a-ko-). I wouldn't expect such influence from
a plain velar.

Piotr