Re: [tied] Re: PIE *y > Gr ?

----- Original Message -----
From: "P&G" <petegray@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, June 26, 2004 10:27 AM
Subject: Re: [tied] Re: PIE *y > Gr ?


> >it is
> >an open question whether *H2y- yields /h-/ because *H2 is voiceless,
> >or /z-/ because *H2 is also a somewhat strong sound.
>
> I have a note from somewhere that "there was early coalescence of *(-)h2y-
> into a single segment, with resyllabification:
> *kreuh2-yo- > *kreu.�o- > * kreu.yo- (cf Skt kravya)
> Thus always in initial position, which is why Greek has prothetic vowels
> before *w- but never before *y-."
>
> If true, this would suggest *h2y- > y-

I wrote the stuff in quotes (citing my own article). Of course my argument
does not predict the eventual reflex of initial *�- in Greek; it only
explains the absence of *&2j-. Because of phonetic considerations, the
marginally favoured expectation is voiceless /h-/ rather than voiced /zd-/,
to my mind, but we'd really need some concrete evidence to back up either
possibility. I wonder if there's still any merit in one old etymology of
<huakintHos>, comparing it with *h2ju-Hn.-k^�- (yuvas'�-, iuvencus, young),
with a substratoid suffix. It doesn't seem to be a bad equation to me, and I
see nothing embarrassing in connecting it with the myth of Hyacinthus.

Piotr