>> In my opinion,=========
>> *k^ is regular
>> *k seems to be rare, or related to post-PIE creations or suffixations.
>> *kw should be the same as *k+*w
>> *k^w is according to my proposal the phonotactic result of any velar
>> (k, g, gh) followed by H1. This contacts created intensive phonemes in
>> Eastern and > Central PIE, which possibly were pronounced *[k:w]
>>(long stop with delayed release) which is treated like k^+w.
>I think your proposed sound change is bizarre, but let me first see if
> I understand it. I think you are saying that:
>1) What are standardly (or at least, frequently) reconstructed as *kW
>(one phoneme) and *k^w (a sequence of two phonemes) and *kw (a
>sequence of two phonemes) were not distinct.
>2) Immediately pre-PIE sound changes *kw > *kW and *k^w > *kW may======
>therefore be assumed for those who propose a distinction.
>3) In Eastern and Central PIE, we effectively have:========
>k^h1-w > k^w
> g^h1-w > k^w
> gH^h1-w > k^w
>I then have the following questions and points.
>A) We can then immediately recover traditional *ek^wos as, in your
>B) How is Western PIE supposed to be different in this respect?======
>C) Are you truly suggesting that the phonation contrast was lost? We=======
>also have, in traditional terms, different reflexes for *gHW (e.g.
>*gHWen 'strike') and *g^Hw (e.g. *g^Hwe:r 'beast').