From: Miguel Carrasquer
Message: 25998
Date: 2003-09-24
>I've always been curious about those etyma. They are clearly unusualYes, I already used this rule (see e.g. my "Morphology 14a": "udder"
>since they contain an otherwise "reduced" vowel in an accented syllable.
>I've considered the possibility that in some instances an early Late IE
>*Vi/Vu may have become PIE *i/*u when it otherwise shouldn't have.
>
>In pronouns like *tu:, I'm sure that the vowel has been simply reduced
>from earlier *teu. The reduction here can be explained as a special
>development of pronouns and demonstratives (such as *i- < *ei,
>*kWi- < *kWei, etc). However, *mu:(h)s "mouse" is strange.
>
>On the other hand, one idea I have to explain it involves possible
>early Late IE rules of syllable shape vis-a-vis laryngeals. If we
>reconstruct *mu:hs "mouse" in the nominative, *u is long as all
>vowels are in the nominative form, while the presence of *h ensures
>that *u always appears long in other case forms. The realization
>of an accented *u here then can be explained as the product of
>an early Late IE nominative *mouh-s& becoming in this special
>case *mu:h-s, rather than **mo:uh-s due to the presence of the
>laryngeal which would otherwise make the one syllable unusual
>in its spoken length and complexity. Thus this etymon might be
>the result of syllable restructuring and simplification.
>
>I suspect that this same syllable restructuring might be to blame
>for other otherwise unsolvable oddities in IE morphology.
>
>Thoughts?