*sth2tós can be read as /stx'tos/, where
[x] is a "guttural" fricative not unlike Spanish "j/x". Between consonants it
was syllabic -- possibly accompanied by a brief reduced vowel [&]
([stx&'tos] or [st&x'tos]).
Here's a table of PIE
consonants:
STOPS
voiceless
p t k^ kW
k
voiced
(b) d g^ gW
g
voiced aspirated bH
dH g^H gWH gH
FRICATIVES
s
xW(=h3) x(=h2) h(=h1)
NASALS
m n
LIQUIDS/GLIDES w l
r j
The symbol "W" stands for labialisation,
i.e. lip-rounding accompanying the articulation of the sound (*kW was pronounced
rather like "qu" in English, but was a single phoneme rather than a sequence of
two). The contrast between *k^ and *k (also in the voiced and aspirated rows) is
a controversial matter. It may well have been the case that *k^ was a "plain"
velar ([k]) and what we write *k was a uvular stop ([q]), pronounced more "in
the throat". In the so-called Satem languages (the Baltic, Slavic, Indo-Iranian,
Armenian and Albanian branches) the third column of stops (*k^, *g^, *g^H)
changed into palatal sounds (ending up as various affricates and fricatives),
hence the special transcription.
The "voiced aspirated" stops (*bH, etc.)
were probably breathy voiced (pronounced with the incomplete closure of the
vocal folds, so that the voicing is not quite efficient and air leaks
between the vocal folds producing a murmur-like friction
noise).
The phoneme *b is bracketed in the
table, because it was a rare sound at best, and some consider it absent
from the PIE consonant inventory.
The phonetic value of the so-called
"laryngeals" (*h1, *h2, *h3) is debatable. The values I suggest in the table
could be questioned by other linguists. The most elusive fellow among them is
*h1, the one we're discussing in this thread. Some people believe it was a
glottal stop (transcribed [?]) rather than [h]. Personally, I wouldn't die for
either theory, though I do prefer [h]. Perhaps we are wrong in reconstructing a
single phoneme "h1" -- the protolanguage may have had both [?] and [h]. The
evidence for *h1 is circumstantial rather than direct.
I omit lots of other controversial issues
for the sake of clarity.
Piotr
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 8:03 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] Thoughts on the existence of *H1
mmm... I really DO have a problem when trying to
read and understand your notation system. Is there a table where listed or
something?
How the heck is "sth2-tó-"
read?