Re: [tied] *h3 (More deja-vu)

From: Piotr Gasiorowski
Message: 15901
Date: 2002-10-03

Perhaps it's the syllabic variety that you find troublesome :). I've never seen syllabic [B] in any language, and I wonder what it might look like if it existed. The resonance (formant structure) of [B] is practically the same as that of [w] and [u] (it's the noise of friction that makes the difference), so one would expect syllabic [B] to be indistiguishable from [u]. Another question: via what stages did *h3 disappear? If through being lenited, how did it avoid a merger with [w]?
----- Original Message -----
From: P&G
Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 5:06 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] *h3 (More deja-vu)

Daft theory of the week:   h3 was actually  /B/ (voiced biabial fricative)
<  **/b/.  Therefore, as required, more "consonantal" than /m n r l w y /,
but still continuant enough to have a syllabic form, replaced by /a/ or /i/.

Please don't lock me up yet.  Even I don't believe it.  But can someone tell
me why I don't believe it???