Reconstruction:Latin/ovum

Two explanations have been proposed for the development of */ɔ/ from Classical Latin /oː/. Perhaps most straightforwardly, there may have been dissimilatory pressure from the following */β/. Cf. */koˈlɔβra/, */ˈjɔβene/ < colubra, iuvenem. A somewhat convoluted alternative is to start with */ˈoβu/ and posit that first */β/ was lost due to the following rounded vowel, then */ˈou/ dissimilated to */ˈɔu/, then */ɔ/ analogically spread from the singular to the plural (resulting in */ˈɔβa/), and finally */β/ spread from the plural back to the singular (resulting in */ˈɔβu/).

Romanian ou and Sardinian o(v)u could derive either from *ŏvum or directly from Classical Latin ōvum. In the former case this reconstruction would have to be assigned to Proto-Romance proper.

It seems virtually certain that if not all then at the very least one of the several occurrences of ⟨ovum⟩ in late or early medieval Latin would have represented a pronunciation with [ɔ]. It is not clear how one might actually prove this in any given case.