Re: [tied] Re: Latin barba in disaccord with Grimm's Law?

--- Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:

> On Sat, 24 Jun 2006 12:03:55 -0700 (PDT), Sean
> Whalen
> <stlatos@...> wrote:

> > That rb is from metathesis. There's no reason to
> >think it's old enough that *o>a hadn't happened
> yet.
> >Besides, I disagree with your rule; o is only
> retained
> >there because it follows *p and *h3 (or more
> probably
> >o>a, later a>o after w/xW/kW/gW happening after
> >*(p>f>xW) in most locations; h3 = xW).
> >
> > The same can be seen in *pod- > otn and *h3osdos
> >
> >ost.

> If I leaf through Birgit Olsen's "The noun in
> Biblical
> Armenian" I can find plenty of examples of Armenian
> /o/
> reflecting PIE /o/ that have nothing to do with
> labials: gog
> < *ghogho-, lok < *logo-, oLj^ < *sol-?, k`os <
> *kosso-,
> k`oLr < *kol-r/n-, t`or.n < *torno-, toRn <
> *dhorbh-n-, koLr
> < gol-r-, gom < *ghos-mn-, etc. Not to mention
> cases of o >
> u before nasal such as cunr< g^onu-.

You do still agree that reflexes of *w and *p, etc.,
can block o>a (or restore it), right? Not all your
examples seem to point to a unique rule (that is,
there are cases of o>a before s). I wouldn't disagree
that L can restore o from a (or something similar,
some evidence is disputed). Of course I agree with
o>u in many instances before o>a (though I'd say
before N it nasalizes a V then syllabic C's become
V(C) and aren't affected by N).

For the other examples I'd recommend that a kind of
vowel assimilation like in Greek or umlaut be
considered.

There's already need for this in cases of e-a > a-a
and similar changes:

dek^m. k^erxas x^nomn.
dek^am k^eras eno~mun
dak^am k^aras ono~mun

tasn sar anun

The exact conditions (if any; it may be as sporadic
as in Greek) aren't certain. The timing depends on
whether stressed o>a first and following o could
restore it or there was a-a umlaut to o-a.



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com