Re: 'Vocalic Theory'

From: fournet.arnaud
Message: 56227
Date: 2008-03-29

----- Original Message -----
From: Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
>>
>>*o, being an originally long vowel, is not affected by
>>laryngeal colouring, just like *e: isn't.
>>
>>Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
>>==============
>>
>>Who believes in this vocalic theory
>>in current PIE circles ?
>
>The fact that *o and *e: are not coloured by laryngeals is
>pretty well established. The non-colouring of *e: was
>already demonstrated by Eichner in 1973 on the basis of such
>Anatolian data as Hitt. mehur 'time' < *mé:h2-wr., hekur
>'summit' < *h2é:k^-wr, sehur 'urine' < *séh2-wr.
>
>============


It can't be *h1
or *h3, which are lost in Hittite in this position (*h1 is
lost in *any* position).

=========
No,
This is just *your* theory
not a fact.

Hittite mehur "time"
Cf. Arabic maHwa "hour, time"

Hittite sehur "urine"
Cf. Arabic saHH "to flow"
and saxab
as of "blood, rain, tears, milk, etc"

H1.2 here /velar unvoiced spirant/

Arnaud

=============
>What is Pokorny number for *seh2-wr ?

*su:-ro-, *sou-ro-, p. 1039.
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal

=======================

Obviously inadequate.

Baltic su:r "salty" is highly interesting
as it is one more case of l > r
as in hartia < *kol
Cf. sal < zahl-
su:r < *zuhl- ?

What is Pokorny for Hekur ?

Arnaud

============