Re: [pieml] Labiovelars versus Palatals + Labiovelar Approximant

At 4:12:59 PM on Sunday, November 2, 2008, Andrew Jarrette
wrote:

> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Edgard Bikelis"
> <bikelis@...> wrote:

>> On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 5:11 PM, Andrew Jarrette
>> <anjarrette@...> wrote:

[...]

>>> Or is it already established doctrine that /u/ and /w/
>>> are allophones of a single sound in PIE?

>> How could the i- and u- declension work otherwise?

[...]

> So should we use a single symbol <u> for [u]/[w] and a
> single symbol <i> for [i]/[j]? Would that be an
> improvement over the apparently more common use of <w> and
> <j> or <y>, or the practice of writing brevets over <u>
> and <i> to indicate their consonantal (or perhaps better
> "non-syllabic") pronunciation?

It doesn't really make much difference as long as the reader
understands what's going on. As a reader I prefer the
differentiated notations.

Brian