This is a question for Jens, but perhaps others are also
interested.
In your o-infix theory, there is a connection between the
syllabic structure or a root and the outcome of the o-infix.
1. Roots of a certain ("simple") structure have unstressed
/o/.
2. Roots with original long vowel have /o:/ (in the
causative).
3. Roots containing a laryngeal (e.g. TeRH) drop the
laryngeal and have stressed /ó/ (in verbal nouns).
4. Roots of a certain ("complex") structure drop the o-infix
and show zero grade.
What I don't fully understand is the exact definition of
"simple" and "complex" roots in the above, as illustrated in
e.g. the Summary of "Morphophonemics of the IE
Protolanguage":
TET -> /o/ (foveo, toga)
TEWT -> Z (s'ubháyate, fuga)
TERH -> /o/ (goné:, janáyati [laryngeal not dropped in the
causative?], cennan)
STERT -> /o/ (spondeo, spondé:)
SRET -> Z (hr.zaya-, sleg)
TWEH -> Z (kuéo:, phué:)
Judging by the last two examples, the complexity of the
onset of the root also plays a role. Is that so?
The most complex root in the above examples is *spend-
(heavy onset + heavy final), and yet it gets /o/. How is
that?
=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...