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

From: Piotr Gasiorowski
Message: 15904
Date: 2002-10-03

Sorry, Miguel, the way I phrased the question, it looks as if I had trouble with the mainstream interpretation of *h3, which of course is not the case. What I meant was this: how could *h3 have avoided (complete) merger with *w if its phonetic value had been [B]?
 
Piotr
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From: Miguel Carrasquer
To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 7:48 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] *h3 (More deja-vu)

On Thu, 03 Oct 2002 19:00:02 +0200, Piotr Gasiorowski
<piotr.gasiorowski@...> wrote:

>Another question: via what stages did *h3 disappear? If through being lenited, how did it avoid a merger with [w]?

It didn't always quite avoid that (*dweh3 > dwo:w ~ dwo:).  To answer your
question: apparently what *h3 did was to dump its labial component onto the
nearest vowel [including the "prop-vowel" when in syllabic position] (eh3 > oh,
h3e > ho, Ch3C > Ch°C) and then it went the way of plain *h1 or *h2 (eh3 > oh >
o:, h3e > ho > o, Ch3C > Ch°C > C°C).

=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...