Peter:
> No, in Classical Sanskrit it is phonemic. /e/ actually is /a/ + /i/,
Alright. I cave on that point. I miscalculated. I suppose that must be
true if I understand vowel theory properly. But still, with inheirited
*i and *u, plus vocalic nasals and liquids, Sanskrit never had a chance
of ever being monovocalic at any point in its past. Do you agree? There
was always a vowel other than /a/ at every stage right up to Sanskrit
and this conforms properly with the known universals.
So this remains a frivolous level of abstraction that goes nowhere. What
does this prove? Certainly not monovocalism, nor monovocalism in any
past stages.
= gLeN