From: Arnaud Fournet
Message: 61440
Date: 2008-11-06
----- Original Message -----
From: "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2008 6:08 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] Laryngeal h4
>
> On 2008-11-06 18:02, Arnaud Fournet wrote:
>
>> I wrote that H2 was voiced or glottalized
>> H2-t is impossible, only H1-t is possible.
>> Not a big surprise.
>
> A moment ago you were re-reconstructing all instances of *-eh2k(^)- as
> *-ah1k(^)-. There are also a few instances of *-eh2p-, whic I suppose
> you would like to explain in the same way. Why is there no *-ah1t-,
> then? Note also that *-h1t- is also rare, rarer, in fact, than
> *-h1d(H)-, which should be ruled out by your analysis.
>
> Piotr
>
==============
It seems your idea that the system of two vowels *e and *o should be
enriched into three *e *o and *a might be right.
I was not on that line before.
I considered there was no need to distinguish *e and *a (I wrote it was just
a matter of convention to use this or that grapheme).
It seems that distinction should be made (or at least investigated).
And it should also be investigated with MCV vocalic system in mind : u/o
o/a/e e/i
eH1d(h) should be rewritten -aH2d(H) with fundamental -a-.
The grapheme H1 is rarer that H2
because H1 stands for two phonemes
when H2 stands for many more.
So this is not a surprise.
We have discussed this before.
But I suppose you dismissed my arguments.
As regards *-ah1t-,
I have no particular explanation
I guess one should first look at the examples.
Maybe there are more examples to be found with nouns
because nouns are less likely to have undergone morphological leveling than
verbs.
Adverbs and adjectives would be even better for that reason.
A.