Re: [tied] PIE dorsals

----- Original Message -----

From: petegray

To: cybalist@egroups.com

Sent: Friday, December 08, 2000 9:44 PM

Subject: Re: [tied] PIE dorsals

>For Latin, Peter Schrijver makes the claim that *k'e > Latin >ce<, whereas plain *ke > ca.  Examples of velar ke > ca are calidus < *kel,  candeo < *(s)kend,  carro < *(s)kers,  carpo < *(s)kerp   scabo < *skebh,  scando  < *skend.  There are some apparent exceptions, e.g. cena < *kerts-na,  celsus < *kelh and a few others.  This claim is still disputed.

 

Looks interesting. I'll think about it. Where did Schrijver publish it?

>For Sanskrit, if I remember rightly, the labiovelars are to be distinguished from the plain velars by the reflex of syllabic r as in guru, which implies a labiovelar, confirmed by developments in Greek /barys/ Latin gravis and elsewhere.

 

There is a similar argument for Balto-Slavic, but this Indic *u is more likely due to the colouring of an original reduced vowel by contiguous consonants -- velars (not necessarily derived form labiovelars), OR labials, as it happens. Also *CRhC > *Cu:rC if the first C is velar or labial. This is a rather recent Indic affair, certainly much later than satemisation.

 

Piotr