Re: Schwa (Was PIE Reconstruction)

From: david_russell_watson
Message: 39026
Date: 2005-07-02

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "C. Darwin Goranson"
<cdog_squirrel@...> wrote:
>
> I think that P@... is more pronouncible that Pxter or Phter,

and

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Rob" <magwich78@...> wrote:
>
> I surmise that e.g. the word for "father" was phonemically
> /pxters/ but *phonetically* [p&x'ters]. In other words, a
> schwa was probably pronounced, but it was not recognized as
> a separate phoneme.

Pssssst!

A fricative can act as syllabic nucleus quite fine,
if indeed it truly is necessary to break up such
clusters. :^)

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "C. Darwin Goranson"
<cdog_squirrel@...> wrote:
>
> ... unless PIEin the early stages was doing what Kartvelian
> is now, using as few vowels as possible in words.

Is that really what Kartvelian is doing, or does it
merely employ a number of complex consonant clusters
larger than that of other languages?

Wording it as you have, one gets the impression that
phonemic transcriptions of Kartvelian can do entirely
without vowels. Is that really so?

In any case, I don't think it's a such a matter of all
or nothing. It's not necessary for P.I.E. to have had
an aversion to vowels before it could have possibly
permitted any consonant clusters of this sort. If it
were, speakers of even English would owe an explanation
to the Japanese. :^)

David