Re: 'Vocalic Theory'

----- Original Message -----
From: "fournet.arnaud" <fournet.arnaud@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, March 29, 2008 3:16 PM
Subject: Re: Re: [tied] RE: 'Vocalic Theory'


>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Piotr Gasiorowski
>
> On 2008-03-29 21:01, fournet.arnaud wrote:
>
> > Who agrees with you ?
> >
> > Watkins for example ?
>
> Whether *o was originally long or not, at least it behaved in some
> respects like a long vowel. For example, we have two patterns of
> alternation in acrostatic roots: *o/*e and *e:/*e. In both cases the
> _weak_ variant has the full vowel *e, which functions as the reduced
> counterpart of either *o or *e:.
>
> Piotr
>
> ============
>
> o is inherently longer than e or a
> because you need to move your lips round
> and your tongue back
> so o is longer mechanically
> and it will remain longer unless
> you change the mouth of Homo Sapiens.
>
> For the same reason ? glottal stop
> is inherently the shortest possible stop,
> because you can do it
> while moving nothing else.
>
> So this argument proves nothing at all.
>
> To be frank, from competent people
> I would expect something less naive.
>
> Arnaud
>
> ==============
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>