Re: [tied] IE numbers

>I'd be happier about your theory if you could show any convincing typological parallel for the curious development *pW

> *kW. The reverse process, kW > p is easy to explain, since a bilabial

element is already present in the input, but the spontaneous velarisation of *pW is hard to justify without some kind of special pleading. The cases in which Germanic has labials for expected labiovelars often involve potential assimilatory environments, e.g. *penkWe, *wlkWos with an initial labial, or *kWetwor- with a medial *-w- (cf. Latin quinque, coquo, quercus for assimilation in the other direction). Sporadic irregulatities in the development of labiovelars are rather common. Note English laugh, enough : daughter, bough, with /x/ > /f/ ~ /x/ > /h/ > zero after rounded vowels, with random variation. Piotr

But Dutch /f/ > /x/ before /t/, eg, 'lucht' vs. German 'Luft'.

Marc

----- Original Message -----
From: Miguel Carrasquer Vidal

To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2001 2:19 AM

Subject: Re: [tied] IE numbers

>Is Germanic the only IE branch where pw>p, instead of pw>kw? That is my theory (there are also the cases where in Germanic we find *b for reconstructed *ghw, such as G. "bitten" < *ghwedh-). There are also cases in other branches where we find unexpected /p/ (e.g. Lat. <lupus> "wolf" or Arm. <leard> (*leprt) "liver").

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.