Re: [tied] PIE dorsals revisited

--- In cybalist@..., "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@...> wrote:

> I used to side with the two-series camp. I changed my opinion
> after a heated discussion on this list, where all the pros and
> cons were reviewed. I believe I started it with the following
> posting:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/4963

Thanks for that pointer. I did try to look up the discussion
before, but as you say it was difficult to find all of it.

> At present I regard the following interpretation of the three
> series (exemplified by their voiceless members) as very plausible:
>
> *k^ = [k] (plain velar, no doubt free to develop slightly
> palatalised allophones)
> *kW = [kW] (labiovelar)
> *k = [q] (uvular)

Oh, I see that I confused which series was thought possibly uvular.
For some reason I thought that the the kW series was always thought
to be the most backed. I also thought, and can't remember my source
for this idea, that uvulars were often associated with rounding (?)

David