On Sat, 19 Apr 2003 10:43:49 +0000, Glen Gordon
<
glengordon01@...> wrote:
>
>Miguel:
>>What rule is that? As far as I can see, there are unreduced /e/'s and
>>/o/'s in the masculine thematic G.sg. (*-o-syo), D.sg. (*-o-ei),
>>Ab.sg. (*-o-ot), perhaps I sg. (*-o-eh1), N.pl. (*-o-es), Gpl.
>>(*-o-om) and D/Ab pl. (*-o-bhyos).
>
>Exactly, Miguel. Although I'd rather write *-osyo, *-o:i, *-o:t, *-o:
>and *-o:s because I'm not convinced that these suffixes were ever
>truely pronounced with **oe.
Well, the circumflex accentuation we have in e.g. the Dsg. -o:~i is
best explained as the result of a contraction, and if there is
contraction, there must once have been hiatus, i.e. two consecutive
vowels. Whether these were phonetically /oe/ or /oo/ or rather their
predecessors (perhaps /a:a/ [a:&] and /a:a:/) is another question,
which depends on the relative ordering of the soundlaws involved
(lengthening to /a:/ (> /o/) of the thematic vowel before voiced
sounds; /a:/ > /o:/ > /o/; /a/ > /&/ > /e/; contraction of V(:)V(:)
to V: with circumflex intonation; reduction and zero grade of
unstressed /e/).
=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...