There are several cases where Sindarin words seem to have lost internal vowels in a way unrelated to the loss of morpheme-boundary vowels in Middle Sindarin, and more reminding of the syncope processes seen in Quenya and Doriathren. For instance
PQ *Tamana > CS Tavn
ANAD > CS And
PQ *Talata- > OS Taltha-
(PQ *Oronē >) MS †Oron > CS Orn
to name just a few. At first I thought Sindarin was influenced by Doriathren/Quenya and randomly employed the syncope for some words while not doing so for most others; however, this doesn't hold up for several reasons. First, there are even (late) Primitive Quendian (or maybe early Common Eldarin) terms exhibiting a similar vowel loss, like
CE Ostō < PQ *Osotō < SOT,
CE As'tāră < PQ *Asatāra < SATAR,
CE Alkwā < PQ *Alakwā < ALAK,
CE Stalgondō < PQ *Stalagondō < STALAG
and it's even represented in some roots:
MIZDI < MISID
ANDA < ANAD
and unlike the usual syncopes of Arda, not all lost vowels have a similar vowel in the preceding syllable.
CE Nki < *Niki
CE ū̆k’lā < PQ *ūkalā < KAL
CE K'lā < PQ *Kalā < KAL
So, this seems to be not a syncope as in Doriathren/Quenya/etc. and it's also not random. For instance, roots of the form (C)VnVd always lose their second vowel in the extended form, e.g.
CE Kwendī < KWEN(ED)
CE Wendē < WEN(ED)
CE Spindē < SPIN(ID)
CE Andā < ANAD
Now, if there is a set of consistent rules behind all this, I can't see it, and maybe I'm just messing three different processes here, but can anyone tell me what's going on with word-internal lost vowels? How can PQ *Tamana become CS Tavn, while PQ Lamana becomes CS Lavan?
PS. I couldn't find an Eldamo article on vowel-suppression in the Primitive Elvish Phonetics section, but I think there ought to be one. The process can't have been in the language from the very beginning, because the vowel-suppression seems to have taken place after certain ancient changes like:
V̄CC > VCC (else ū̆k’lā would be uk'lā),
VyC > ViC (else PQ Yuyuñal would be Q Yúial),
VŋV > VɣV (else PQ Yuyuñal might never have lost ñ, since y is a C and it's not said that CŋV > CɣV)
Telerin cl > cul (else PQ *Acalar, yielding S Aglar, would become Telerin Acular instead of Aclar (cf. Hecul))
On the other hand it must have been a fairly ancient process, occuring before other CE developments like:
sd > zd (CE Ezdē might otherwise be Esdē. Also MISID > MIZDI and not MISDI)
CE loss of -a/-e/-o (cf. As'tāră, and CE And(a))
CE change of -i/-u to -e/-o in polysyllables (else Nki would be Nke)
PPS. By the way, why is it necessary to add a prosthetic to KALAR in order to deduce a word like Akalara from it? Wouldn't Kalara do as well? Since when do we need more than a root and a suffix to form a word in PQ? And is this prosthetic maybe responsible for the lost vowel in Ak'lara, or is the occurence of both a coincidence?
Thanks in advance for your answers.