We can't. There's no historical continuity
between the two. Even if the PIE ablaut triad *e/*o/Ø (plus *a derived from
*h2-coloured *e) are reflexes of a single underlying _pre_-PIE vowel (let's
call it *A) -- and this is indeed what internal reconstruction within PIE
suggests -- Vedic (as well as Proto-Iranian) /a/ does not derive directly from
it, but from the merger of _more recent_ (but still PIE) *e, *o and *a. I
won't bore the list with the proof: the releveant facts have been presented more
than once, and anyone interested in them may search the archive. Additionally,
there are morphemes containing *o which does not undergo qualitative ablaut
(and, if *h3-colouring is ruled out, may derive from something
different than *A). Finally, Vedic /a/ is also a reflex of PIE syllabic nasals
(as in <s'atam> < *k^mtom).
Piotr
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 9:06 AM
Subject: [tied] Re: Sanskrit and e, a, o
--- In cybalist@......,
"tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@......>
wrote:
> > According to the good old "Sanskrit consonants
and Greek
vowels" rule, PIE had a vowel (how come this "Ablaut vowel"
doesn't
have a name?) which was realised as e/o/nothing.
How about
calling it Vedic a.