Piotr:
> But PIE *w, the very essence of labiality, has no rounding effect
> either.
I think that this is immaterial. When a language has both *kw and *kW
in its speech, it inevitably prompts one to ask what the difference
is if one isn't familiar with such differences. We've talked about this
before and my view was simply that *kW is a "light" version of *kw.
Since *kw is two phonemes, *w is pronounced with full effect, full
rounding of the lips as one would round them in French, the language
of love :)
However, *kW must then have been with a weak and much subtler rounding
like that in English "coat". If so, this idea, in combination with the
connection of *k/*q/*kW to *h/x/hW (h1/h2/h3), explains why *hW rounds
without *w doing the same.
How so?
Well, in English, we have the case of "what", sometimes pronounced
with voiceless initial "w" and sometimes with plain ol' "w" as in
my own dialect. Voicing has affected all instances of "wh" in my
speech so they are merged with normal voiced "w" but has not affected
the velar-stop-equivalent like "kw". I still say "queen" not "gueen".
Likewise, I could see *hW, with weak rounding, being prone, as in Eng.,
to being voiced. However, without merging to full blown *w (which would
require more rounding effort, btw), the only thing *hW could do is
impart its dying rounding quality to the neighbouring vowel. Since
*w on the other hand is strongly rounded, the distinction between it
and a neighbouring vowel would be more distinct and easier to seperate.
So just as "what" [hW^t] becomes [w^t], *hWer- becomes *or- without
there being similar voicing or rounding with *kW or other like
phonemes. Basically, once the "h"-element in *hW disappears, what
does the weak rounding have to anchor itself to but the neighbouring
vowel?
= gLeN