Miguel:
>I don't understand what you say about *e:. As to *o:, as far as it's not
>from *eh3, it occurs in closed syllables only (*n�po:ts, *p�:ds), and so it
>doesn't conflict with *o, which is always short in closed syllables.
Actually...
I can only see *-o being in a true open syllable word-finally given what we
know of typical root shapes, however the occurence of *-o is rare for
good reason. Understandly so if you pay attention to MIE accentuation
and later syncope rules which left the existence of eLIE **-a outright
impossible.
Regardless, there are the mediopassive endings like *-so with short *o,
while 1ps thematic is long *-o: so your rules do indeed conflict without
having to resort to "ghost laryngeals": Thus supposedly 1ps *-oH and
1ps pronoun *egoH instead.
This is of course silly because there is no direct substantiation to side
with your view of *o as originally being a long vowel, nor does the
internal evidence really substantiate (nor SHOULD substantiate) your
pre-IE huntches, nor is this the most economical view. I've already
provided the sufficient, simpler equation of short *o < MIE short *a
but you meet it with illogical resistance in favour of something more
inane as this.
Why reconstruct needless and unattested laryngeals just to patch an
unproductive theory unless one makes it a practice to ignore parsimony
to hold on to self-comforting convictions? Is the act of discarding
efficient theories and adopting unjustifiably complex ones a logical thing
to do in your view?
= gLeN
_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail