Cowgill's Law
Get Cowgill's Law essential facts below. View Videos or join the Cowgill's Law discussion. Add Cowgill's Law to your PopFlock.com topic list for future reference or share this resource on social media.
Cowgill's Law

Cowgill's law, named after Indo-Europeanist Warren Cowgill, refers to two unrelated sound changes, one occurring in Proto-Greek and the other in Proto-Germanic.

Cowgill's law in Greek

In Proto-Greek, Cowgill's law[1] says that a former /o/ vowel becomes /u/ between a resonant (/r/, /l/, /m/, /n/) and a labial consonant (including labiovelars), in either order.

Examples:

  • "night" < PIE *nok?ts (cf. Lat. nox, Ved. nák < *nakts, Goth. nahts, Hitt. gen. sg. nekuz /nek?ts/)
  • "leaf" < PIE *b?olyom (cf. Lat. folium)
  • ? "mill" < PIE *mol-eh?- (cf. Lat. mol?na)
  • ? "nail" (stem ónukh-) < early PG *onok- < PIE h?nog- (cf. OE nægl < PGerm *nag-laz)

Note that when a labiovelar adjoins an /o/ affected by Cowgill's law, the new /u/ will cause the labiovelar to lose its labial component (as in núks and ónuks/ónukh-, where the usual Greek change *k? > p has not occurred).

Cowgill's law in Germanic

Cowgill's law in Germanic[2] has no relation to Cowgill's law in Greek other than having been named after the same person. It says that a PIE laryngeal /h?/, and possibly /h?/, turns into /k/ in Proto-Germanic when directly preceded by a sonorant and followed by /w/. This law is still controversial, although increasingly accepted. Donald Ringe (2006) accepts it;[2]Andrew Sihler (1995) is noncommittal.[1]

Examples are fairly few:

  • *kwikwaz "alive" (whence English quick) < PIE *g?ih?-wos (cf. Lat. v?vus)
  • *unkw- "us two" (cf. Goth. unkis) < PIE *n?h?we (cf. Gk. n?; Ved. ?vm acc. du. "us two" < *?va-ám)
  • Possibly OE t?cor "husband's brother" < PIE *dayh?w?r (cf. Gk. dr, Ved. dev, Lat. l?vir)

If it becomes generally accepted, the relative chronology of this law could have consequences for a possible reconstructed phonetic value of h?. Since Germanic /k/ results from earlier PIE /g/, and since the change occurred before Grimm's law applied (according to Ringe), the resulting change would be actually h?w > g?. This would have been more likely if h? was a voiced velar obstruent to begin with. If h? was a voiced labiovelar fricative as is occasionally suggested, the change would therefore have been: w > .

Notes

  1. ^ a b Sihler, Andrew L. (1995). New Comparative Grammar of Greek and Latin. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-508345-8.
  2. ^ a b Ringe, Don (2006). From Proto-Indo-European to Proto-Germanic. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-955229-0.

References


  This article uses material from the Wikipedia page available here. It is released under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share-Alike License 3.0.

Cowgill's_law
 



 



 
Music Scenes