Re: [tied] Thoughts on the existence of *H1

--- In cybalist@..., Miguel Carrasquer Vidal <mcv@...> wrote:

> And /r./ was still syllabic in the Common Slavic period, as is

proven

> by the fact that the reflexes show great dialectal variety: we have
> true syllabic /r./ in Serbian/Croat, Slovenian, Czech and Slovak;
> /er/, /or/ (< /Ir/, /Ur/) in Russian; /rI/, /rU/ in Church Slavonic;
> /&r/ (CrC) and /r&/ (CrCC) in Bulgarian; and we have /ier/ (~

<ierz>)

> and /ar/ in Polish [the latter form directly disproving any
> possibility of reconstructing /Ur/ [alternating with /rU/] in Common
> Slavonic, as Bräuer tries].

Very interesting. I can also add some Old Russian dialects had
even /UrU/, /IrI/, /UrY/ etc (see my posting on Krivichian). If we
assume the Balto-Slavic stage, then we have to postulate true
syllabic /r./ for BS and, as East and West Baltic languages split is
usually ascribed to the middle of the I millenium BC and the
registered Baltic languages doesn't demonstrate the syllabicity
of /r./ in any way, we have to come to conclusion Proto-Slavic was
much more archaic in that point in phonetical terms that the Baltic
languages, which would be a strange exception.

Sergei