Re: [tied] Germanic KW

--- Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...> wrote:

> On 2007-05-27 22:22, Sean Whalen wrote:

> > But *gWhe/ormo+ > warm seems certain, especially
> > since *gWh>gW>w in other positions, also.
>
> One funny thing about PGmc. labiovelars is that they
> tend to lose their
> labiality next to root-internal apophonic *o, as in
> *gWolbHo- > *kalBa-,
> *dHogWHo- > *ðaGa- or *kWol(h1)so- > *xalsa-. That
> doesn't seem to work
> with *warma-, so perhaps it reflects *gWHermo- (as
> in Gk., Arm. and
> Alb.) with a coloured vowel.

I do believe that KW/P can change e>o in early
changes in many branches (not all necessarily regular)
but in this particular word there might be mixing
between 'warm' and 'warmth' with dif. vowels that
confuse the evidence.

> > *pn,kWttis > *funxWstiz > fist
>
> A well-taken point. Of course it's still possible
> that xW was
> delabialised after *u even if a nasal intervened,
> especially as nasals
> were vocalised very early in this position.

If I'm right *nKW > *NWKW with the whole cluster
delabialized after u in Gothic, at least. The timing
doesn't seem to allow this to be Proto-Germanic,
however.

> > I understand. When I first began my
> reconstruction
> > I hoped I could find regular rules to explain all
> the
> > KW>P changes. However, nothing worked well enough
> and
> > I couldn't come to any conclusion but KW>P being
> > sporadic, varying with position and the type of
> KW,
> > and possibly ending prematurely in some languages
> due
> > to kW>k(w), etc.
>
> ... which is probably the majority opinion. Thanks
> for the nice discussion.

You're welcome.




____________________________________________________________________________________Get the free Yahoo! toolbar and rest assured with the added security of spyware protection.
http://new.toolbar.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/norton/index.php