On 2008-02-13 01:06, Miguel Carrasquer Vidal wrote:
> But there are more cases where *o alternates with zero or
> *u. Right now I can think of the perfect participle
> *-wo(:)t-/-us-, and the words *k^uo:n/*k^un- "dog",
> *h3noghW-/*h3n.ghW- "nail", *h3nobh-/*h3m.bh- "navel".
That's true, and so I would't exclude the existence of a fundamental *o
entirely. However, the evidence is scanty and alternative explanations
are possible at least in some cases. *-wo(:)t- is posttonic, which
accounts for the vocalism, and *k^uo:n (a quasi-participle with a a lost
*t at the end? cf. *xunða-) might be a formation parallel to *h1d-ónt-.
The problem is of course that it's unanalysable in terms of known IE
etyma unless Hamp was right about the connection with *pek^u-
(*pk^w-ón(t)- might work).
Piotr