PIE *tk^ (was Re: Nostratic (was Re: Schwebeablaut (was Re: tolkien?)))

Hallo!

On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 11:16:58 -0700,
Muke Tever <hotblack@...> wrote:

> On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 15:38:20 +0100, Jörg Rhiemeier
> <joerg_rhiemeier@...> wrote:
> >>      If we presume that the original root was
> >> *layakWa, penultimate accent and vowel-reduction would have given
> >> *lyakW. But that form is clearly not the root for PIE; is it possible
> >> that *laikW was reached via metathesis?
> >
> > Why not posit *likWa?  The problem arises only because you insist
> > on a one-vowel system ***which is not attested in any language***.
>
> I have half a mind to invent a zero-vowel conlang, where only the
> consonants are phonemic.  Vowels would arise in descendents because
> anaptyctic schwas would naturally appear, and a uniform stress may or may
> not arise... analogy might put vowels in places where they wouldnt have
> been expected to begin with.
My conlang Proto-Hesperic can be described as having a single vowel
segment to which autosegmental vowel features attach.  But that's
not really a one-vowel language, let alone a no-vowel language.
It's just a language with an elaborate system of vowel harmony,
ablaut and umlaut.

> >> >> PIE was fairly lenient on consonant clusters.
> >> >
> >> >Which suggests that quite a number of vowels were lost.
> >>
> >> Exactly.  Furthermore, there are apparently many instances of the
> >> cluster -tk- in PIE.  Another language group with this feature is
> >> Kartvelian.
> >
> > Yes.  Paul Bennett goes as far as positing a series of dental-velar
> > doubly articulated stops (i.e., treating *tk as monophonemic),
> > but that is untenable because forms with *tk- are zero grades,
> > alternating with *tek-.
>
> No... *tk^eH1- "gain control, erwerben" and *tk^ey- "dwell" are full
> roots, with separate o- and zero-grades (*tkoy-mo- > Gmc *haimaz 'home',
> *tk^ey- > Ved kṣéti "dwells", *tki-teH2- > Gk κÏ?ίÏ?ηÏ,).
>
> And where does the full grade of *H2r=tk^os "bear" go?
There is Hittite _hartagga_.

> The voiced version of *tk^, (*dhg^h) also appears in full roots, *dhg^hem-
> "earth",
The form *dheg^hom- also exists.

>      *dhg^hu:- "fish", *dhg^hes- "yesterday".
Any way, the assumption that *tk^, *dg^ and *dhg^h are single phonemes
is to be rejected.

Merry Christmas,

Jörg.

Replies