Re: [tied] *kW- "?"

----- Original Message -----
From: "glen gordon" <glengordon01@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 25, 2005 5:25 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] *kW- "?"



<snip>

> Now we need to speak about my theory of Mid IE which
> is based on Bomhardian Nostratic. In my view, /k./
> is merely an allophone of *k and there is no basis
> to add *q to the earlier inventory based on IE. Both
> IE *k and *q would derive from Proto-Steppe *k only.
> Within the sphere of IE-Uralic-Altaic, there is no
> credible support for a phoneme *q distinct from *k,
> unless you're willing to show me otherwise :)
>
>
> = gLeN

***
Patrick:

Pre-PIE had [*nk], which corresponds to [*k.] (or [*q>] in PAA (Egyptian <q>
and <g>).

I think it quite possible that earliest PIE had _post_-velar [*k.] as a
reflex of pre-PIE [*nk] contrasting with velar [*k] as a reflex of pre-PIE
[*k] and [*kH].


***