Re: [tied] Laryngeal theory as an unnatural

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:

> On Sat, 25 Jan 2003 20:42:39 +0000, "Glen Gordon"
> <glengordon01@...> wrote:
>

> After eliminating these, there remain a number of unexplained

cases. I

> see no reason to think that a single solution must exist for these
> remaining cases, when there are at least four different solutions

for

> the ones above.
>
> One solution for a number of cases would be a nasalized vowel **/ã:/
> which would have remained as /a/, while its non-nasalized

counterpart

> **/a:/ became /o/. This might explain a number of words such as
> Pokorny's *dha(m)b(h)-, *g^hans-, *la(m)b(h)- [2x], *mad-, *mag^h-,
> *mag^-, *mand-, *man-us, *marko-, *matH-, *mat-, *mazdo-, *nant-,
> *nas-, *pando-, *pank-/*pang-, *sal- (if *sa(m)-l-), *tap- (*tap-n-

),

> *wank^-.
>

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

Or the other way around? I believe Polish pronounces /a~/ as /o~/
so /a~/ > /o/ would make sense.

Would that be (an, am, aN) vs a~: vs. a: (the nasal providing the
length of the resulting vowel)?

And could the otherwise unexplained pH/b, dH/t, etc alternatation be
explained as the result of a "hidden" nasal?

Torsten