Re: [tied] Labiovelars

Yes,

I understand that opposition.

But I have a difficulty in really believing that such a minimal
phonetic difference as it have to be between a labiovelar (The velar
and labial component articulated simultaneously) and the sequence kW
could constitute a phonemic difference.

I think the difference must somehow have been greater. Perhaps the W-
component in kW was syllabic? Or perhaps there was some other added
difference.


In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Wordingham
<richard.wordingham@...>" <richard.wordingham@...> wrote:

> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Glen Gordon" <glengordon01@...>
> wrote:
> >
> > >Was there really in IE an opposition between the labiovelars kw,

gw

> > >and ghw and the sequenses ku gu and ghu (with ayllabic u)
> >
> > Don't you understand the difference between *kWi- "who, what" and
> > *kwon-? The latter becomes Sanskrit /s'van-/ because of
> palatalisation
> > of *k. However *kW- normally becomes Sanskrit /k/ or when
> palatalized
> > it becomes /c/.
> >
> > - gLeN
>
> For a more phonetic discussion, see
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/13869 .
>
> Richard.