[tied] Re: Unreality...

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Rob" <magwich78@...> wrote:

> About the possibility of monovocalism in some (pre)stage of PIE, I
> think it is possible. As Jens has pointed out, the vocalism of
> reconstructed roots is terribly one-sided (factoring out the
> Ablaut). One can say that the majority of PIE roots are defined by
> their consonants. However, there are many roots, such as the
> infamous *wer-'s, that have the same sound-shape but different
> meanings. This homonymity can be explained by the following: 1.
> Semantic shifts, and/or 2. Previously different sound-shapes that
> collapsed together due to sound changes.
>
> Jens, why does *e > *o before voiced segments only in stem-final
> vowels? Also, isn't it easier to front and unround a back rounded
> vowel than vice versa?

I don't know, but my guess would be prehistoric sandhi between stem
and flexive. The unmarked vowel is certainly /e/ in the stage we
reconstruct. We find /o/ caused by accent weakening and by sonority
increase. The common denominator would seem to be tonal lowering. And
[o] does have a lower tone than [e], so that's my guess at a
causation.

Jens