TeX notation in e-mail [was Re: Loaded "HOW LIKELY" questions]

[Richard M. Alderson III]

On Fri, 24 Mar 2000, Pat Ryan (proto-language at email.msn.com) wrote:

> 1) I believe the root of *kwekw-lo- should be emended to *k^wek^w-lo- on the
> strength of the palatal responses in Old Indian;

I'm really not sure what you mean by the collocation <k^w>:  If *I* wrote it,
it would be a TeX-style notation indicating a superscript <w>--that is, the
labiovelar.  Is this what you mean?  It is, of course, the correct notation
for the word reconstructed on the basis of Skt. _cakras_, Gk. _kuklos_, Eng.
_wheel_, etc.

Or do you mean to indicate a palatal *k', in which case the evidence is very
much against you?

Many of the people writing on this list are often sloppy with regard to the
writing of labiovelars (as in *{k^w}e{k^w}los) vs. clusters of palatal+*w (as
in *ek'wos "horse").  If we were all careful to write in a (somewhat modified)
TeX-style, as I have noted in the past, this sort of question would not arise.

								Rich Alderson