Re: [tied] Re: ka and k^a

----- Original Message -----
From: "etherman23" <etherman23@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 10:07 AM
Subject: [tied] Re: ka and k^a


> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Ryan" <proto-language@...>
> wrote:
>
> > I meant, of course:
> >
> >
> > The idea that laryngeals 'color' vowels to *a and to *o is, by itself,
> > totally ridiculous.
>
> How so? In Arabic laryngeals color vowels, and can disappear with
> compensatory lengthening.

***
Patrick:

In my opinion, Arabic pharyngeal/laryngeals do not 'color' vowels to *a or
*o.

Some Arabic pharyngeal/laryngeals LOWER vowels, and some
pharyngeal/laryngeals ROUND vowels, but none FRONTS or BACKS vowels. *e to
*a would constitute 'backing'; as would *e to *o. *o to *a would constitute
'fronting'.

If Arabic pharyngeal/laryngeals did disappear, they would be of far less
interest.

They are interesting precisely because they persist: <?, h, ¿, H> are rarely
lost.

You are thinking of <w> and <y>, which can combine with a vowel, bringing
about compensatory lengthening.

***