Re: [tied] Albanian outside the centum-satem division?

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...>
wrote:

> Grzegorz Jagodzinski wrote:
>
> > This material is not convincing. As Hermann pointed out in his

discussion of

> > the problem (1907: 47f.), the velars may have been restored

analogically in

> > these words.
>
> Hardly in causatives (like *sworgH-éje/o- > dergjem), which never

had a

> back vowel after the root-final consonant in any of their

conjugational

> forms, and so no obvious source of analogical influence can be

proposed.

> In roots with a securely reconstructed final labiovelar we do find

the

> expected palatalisalion (e.g. ndez 'ignite' < *-dHogWH-éje/o-) and

I'm

> not aware of any velar restoration there.

It works if one assumes like I do that the allophone that was
regularised away became stigmatised as a "shibboleth" variant. That
would have made the originally regularisation-induced change spread
to environments in which the now preferred non-stigmatised allophone
had never occurred before.


Torsten