From: Jens Elmegaard Rasmussen
>Yes. The result would be as in Sanskrit where /a/ has precisely that
> So you do find it possible that at a period there was only one phonemic
> vowel in PIE?
> Many linguists do not want to accept that possibilityWhat you find in specific terms is *never* likely to be exactly as it is.
> of the typological reasons (although there were some analysis of the
> supposed one vowel phoneme-languages in Caucasus) in spite of the fact
> there are a lot of facts which point in that direction - most stems
> *e vocalism and those which do not have it seeming younger, three velar
> series (*K, *K', *Kw) which would point to the palatalisation and
> labialisation of velars being the way of preserving the distinctions of
> prior neuter-front-back vowel which have all collapsed to *e, maybe some
> loans into IE like Semitic *sab?atum > *septm etc.
> But why these words? How do you then explain the Vollstufe/NullstufeIf nothing plays a trick on us (as much of it of course may well do, but
> alternation in these words easily explained wtih *eh2/h2? Doesn't Lith.
> nósis (with acute, from *neh2s-) and Slavic nos7 (from *nh2s-) just
> to be reconstructed with a laryngeal (also Slavic sol7 < *sh2l- and Lat.
> sa:l < *seh2l-)?