>Because k^ and k are frequently assumed to be allophones. Not everyone
> --- In email@example.com, "fournet.arnaud" <fournet.arnaud@>
> >> 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.
> If it were so clearly different, I wonder why people like Meillet, W.
> Lehmann, Beekes, Bomhard work with only two series.
> I suppose awkward is syllabicated awk # ward.or do we
> We have no reason to suppose English syllabication applies to PIE,
> ?I never argued for such a thing. I'm merely pointing out that kW and
> Until I've been comprehensively refuted, I consider thatfrom any
> k+w = kw but k^w is KHw with KH being an intensive velar resulting
> velar + H1.I suppose the utter lack of any evidence for this is not a refutation.