Re: [tied] Celtic n (was: Greek labiovelars)

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Sean Whalen <stlatos@...> wrote:

>
> > - unconditioned raising in front of *n+g: *tangWa:t-
> > 'tongue' >
> > *tængWa:t- > *tingWa:th- > tengae (subsequent
> > lowering i > e).
>
> That doesn't explain *ksum-h2ango-s > *com-ango-s >
> cumang OIr; cyfyng W; "narrow"

We don't expect palatalization of -m- folowing a retained, non-
palatal vowel (exception in / a__i)... Or is that not what you're
getting at?

>
> possibly also:
>
> *h1lengWH- "light, leap" 3rd sng. perf. *h1eh1longWHe
> >
> *eh1longWHe > *leh1longWHe > *legWHlongWHe >
> *h1eblong^e > leblaing OIr

I don't see what that says about the problem. I must be getting
tired.

>
> > OIr. céimm (VN of cingid), W cam 'step' is not
> > really a problem:
> > *kn.g(H)-s-mn- > PCelt. *kan(x)sman > Ir. céimm
> > (*-ansm- > *-æ:ssm-
> > > -émm-), > Brit. *kamm (*-ansm- > *-assm- > *-amm-,
> > regularly
> > without length).
> >
> > In British Celtic you _can_ tell the difference
> > between PCelt. *aNC
> > and *eNC
>
> But that could be because en- > e~n- then n. > en or
> the opposite.
>

Could you spell out your scenario?