From: Patrick Ryan
Message: 53158
Date: 2008-02-14
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Wordingham" <richard@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 3:44 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] *a/*a: ablaut
--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Ryan" <proto-language@...>
wrote:
>
> Thank you very much for information _without_ the cake icing.
>
> Obviously, there is no way I can immerse myself in the latest
literature
> which, I have the feeling, you do. But I would have thought I would
have
> heard of *&.
>
> But is this not a real sonor ex machina?
>
> The major objection I would have to it (*i, *u, *&, *a) is, that to
my way
> of thinking, it is asymmetrical: one height level for front and back
but two
> heights for central.
Actually, it has an unusual degree of symmetry. 4 vowel systems are
usually more asymmetric. For yet more examples, we have the
Proto-Austronesian system of /a, e, i, u/, and the Cree system, with
length contrasts, of /a, e, i, o/. Indeed the latter system seems
quite widespread in Canada.
Richard.
<snip>
***
What would be symmetrical is *i, *a, *u.
Also symmetrical is *I, *e, *&, *a, *u, *o.
Patrick
***