Fwd: Re: [tied] PIE laringeals

h2 Yielding an a in some languages and i in other could occur if the
vocalization went through some intermediate stages. An uvular
spirant could glide into a velar spirant between two other
consonants. This velar allophonem could the yield a narrow middle
wovel when vocalized. THis narrow middle vowel could the easily be
opened to an "a", or glide foreward to an "i".

I think some questions can be solved by considering possible
allophonems of h2 and h3. Uvular/velar is one possibility.

Velar/pharyngeal is another. In my own language, Norwegian, we have
the phonem "h". But this phonem is procounced in three ways
according to the phonetic surroundings: a glottal approximant, a
pharyngeal fricative/approxumant and a velar approximant/fricative.

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

>
> How do all these sounds fit into PIE phonotactics?
> Another thing, I can't work out how these fricatives (back, and

maybe

> even low) could yield an 'i' in indo-iranian, corresponding to 'a'

in

> other language groups, when vocalised.
> As for BSl., they (or at least their reflex) must have been

somehow

> similar to PIE voiced (glottalised?) plosives, as they excerted

the

> same effect - i.e. the 'acute' intonation, whatever it may have

been.

> David
>
>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "aquila_grande" <aquila_grande@>
> wrote:
>
> In many european languages, an uvular spirant (uvular r, unvoised
> uvular spirant) colours the e into a. I therefor tink h2 likly was
> an uvular spirant. A rounded uvular spirant would likely produce

an

> o-colouring and hence be h3.
>
> But also a rounded voiced pharyngeal spirant is likely to give an

o-

> colouring.
>
> I don't think roundedness was decisive. Why didn't the other

rounded

> consonants produce such colouring then?
>
> Then h1 would likely be a h-sound. (A glottal or pharyngeal
> approximant/spirant)
>
>
>