<html><body>
<p><tt><font size="2">></font></tt><tt><font size="2">> If we don't reconstruct *m, *n in Proto-Siouan, how about a reconstruction of *W = *pw, *R = *tr ? Would this slot be open?<br>
</font></tt><br>
<tt><font size="2">I think I should have asked this a little differently: </font></tt><tt><font size="2">*W < *pw, *R < *tr ? Or even *W < *wVw, *R < *rVr ? I.e., derived from, not necessarily equal to.</font></tt><br>
<br>
<tt><font size="2">> </font></tt><tt><font size="2">"Slots" or "pigeon holes" would need to be open, of course, but there is a bigger problem. The reconstructions have to be made to jibe with what we know of the morphology. And there just aren't any prefixes that undergo syncope with the shape *pV or *tV. [...]</font></tt><br>
<br>
<tt><font size="2">This morphemic argument is intriguing, but I need to level set a little to follow it. My understanding is that we have many cases of *R that arose within branches of Siouan from clusters like stop + *r. *W is less common, and some cases of both *R and *W apparently go back to proto-Siouan. I thought these were the cases referred to as "unexplained".</font></tt><br>
<br>
<tt><font size="2">If this is all correct, then I had meant the question only for the ones apparently going back to proto-Siouan or before. Do we know enough about pre-proto-Siouan phonology and morphology to limit what clusters could have existed in proto-Siouan or its near ancestors? If so, how? And are we assuming that all consonant clusters in proto-Siouan must be the result of syncope of a morphemic prefix?</font></tt><br>
<br>
<tt><font size="2">Rory</font></tt><br>
</body></html>