Re: p <-> kw

En réponse à Robert B Wilson <han_solo55@...>:

>
> how do we know it wasn't "bo:us" in PIE?
*b is nearly absent in PIE (As far as I know, only 1 reconstructed root
contains *b. It could be a borrowing from another language. It's one of the
reasons the glottalic theory of PIE has been proposed, since if voiced
consonants are interpreted as ejectives, then the absence of the labial
articulation is normal), and we know the outcome of *gwo:us in other IE
languages that make it sure that it was *gw rather than *b.

  if a b > gw change is
> possible,
> then it is almost impossible to tell which consonant was present in
> PIE.
>
Yes it is, because in other language *gw had a different outcome which couldn't
be explained if the origin was *b.

>
> well, i can give the sentence in which i first noticed it:
> "i'll be back in a few minutes."
> [OL g_wij b&k In @ fj@u mIn3ts]
>
> i think it's very odd that the "b" in "be" is changed and the one in
> "back" isn't.
>
Looks to me like the presence of the velar l provokes some kind of assimilation
of the labial consonant into a labiovelar one. Do you have any example of b>gw
in a non-velar context?

Christophe.

http://rainbow.conlang.free.fr

Take your life as a movie: do not let anybody else play the leading role.

Reply