--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "batinquo" <batinquo@...> wrote:
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@> wrote:
> > On 2009-01-26 20:25, alexandru_mg3 wrote:
> > > I saw an article of Jens showing that
> > > e:h2 / h2e: weren't coloured to a:
> > > and
> > > e:h3 / h3e: weren't coloured to o:
> > >
> > > Is this a general opinion?
> >
> > Yes, the rule is known as Eichner's Law and it is almost
generally
> > accepted in the field.
> >
> > Piotr
>
> ...but not by Alwin Kloekhorst, whose Hittite Etymological
Dictionary
> rejects the standard examples me:hur, se:hur, kane:ss-, henkan-,
> hippara- etc (he gives a full list under mehur, p568). Does anyone
> have any thoughts on his treatment of these forms - convincing,
> unconvincing?
>
> Oliver Simkin
>
The "Leiden" school (Kortlandt, Beekes, Lubotsky and the younger
ones) does not accept Eichner's Law. In part they may feel that the
evidence is insufficient, in part it may be because of Balto-Slavic
accentology, where Kortlandt assumes that only laryngeal length gives
acute, whereas old long vowels give circumflex (this obviously works
quite well for final syllables).
This is then combined with a denial of a PIE phoneme /a/.
So in order to explain the circumflex of e.g. Latv. sa:`ls 'salt',
the Leiden school posits *se:h2ls, _with_ coloration of *e:h2 >
*a:h2. But we then need an additional rule deleting a laryngeal after
a long vowel or else we can't explain the circumflex reflected in
Latv. sa:`ls (this rule is ad hoc, if I am not mistaken).
I hope I haven't misrepresented the views of the Leiden school, but
at least one member of it subscribes to this list and will be able to
correct me :-)
Anders