Re: [tied] *kW- "?"

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "etherman23" <etherman23@...> wrote:

> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
>
> > > I disagree that /e/, /o/, and zero are allophones of *a, though.
> >
> > *a is just a label. It means (here) "the PIE ablaut vowel". Or "the

set

> > of vowels which descend from pre-PIE /a/". Just like English [-a-]
> > really means /ä/ or /eI/ or /&/.
>
> Sure, but I also believe in PIE /a/ so I'd rather write *e for /e/,
> /o/, and zero.

Be my guest ;-)

Does your belief in PIE /a/ include its being 'native' PIE? Surely, if
pre-PIE /a/ -> {/e/, /o/, zero}, PIE would have had a hole where /a/
was supposed to be (except for the environment of 'plain' /k/, /h2/
etc). Where would reconstructed PIE /a/ have come from?


Torsten