Re: [tied] PIE Stop System

----- Original Message -----
From: "P&G" <petegray@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 12:49 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] PIE Stop System


> >... 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, ..
>
> Just a thought - if you suggest **/ka, ke, ko/ > */ke, k^e, kWe/, why did
> this not also happen with **/ta, te, to/ and **/pa, pe, po/ etc, which can
> equally well be palatalised or labialised. If a collapse could be
tolerated
> after a non-velar consonant, why did it have to be preserved after a
velar?
>
> Peter

/p'/ and /pw/ are not so common, especially /pw/, also /tw/ is hardly as
common as /kw/ etc. In Sanskrit, the trace of PIE *e can be seen only at
velars, not in, for instance, PIE *t although that would be imaginable. It
is more probable that velars will be palatalised or labialised than other
phonemes.

Mate