From: Patrick Ryan
Message: 57248
Date: 2008-04-13
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian M. Scott" <BMScott@...>
To: "Patrick Ryan" <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, April 13, 2008 2:20 PM
Subject: Re[2]: Horse Sense (was: [tied] Re: Hachmann versus Kossack?)
> At 2:44:19 PM on Sunday, April 13, 2008, Patrick Ryan wrote:
>
> > From: "etherman23" <etherman23@...>
>
> >> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "fournet.arnaud"
> >> <fournet.arnaud@...> wrote:
>
> >>> Indo-iranian works only if we accept the fancy that kw
> >>> and k+w are not the same. A notion that circularly
> >>> refers to reconstructoids that are dubious.
>
> >> k^w, kw, and kW are clearly different. To hear the
> >> difference between kw and kW just listen to the words
> >> quick and awkward.
>
> > Poor example, I am afraid.
>
> > [kw] vs. [k]+[w] needs to be in the same syllable.
>
> [kw] *is* [k] + [w]; the distinction in question is between
> [kW] and [kw].
>
> It is a poor example, but for a rather different reason:
> those of us who have /O:/ for the first vowel typically have
> either ['O:kWw&(r)d] or even ['O;kW&(r)d].
>
> Brian
***
Are you really serious about ['O:kWw&(r)d]?
I have traveled all over this country; and I have never heard the labial
glide followed by [w].
Is it another Briticism?
Patrick