From: Miguel Carrasquer
>--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:They're not.
>> On Tue, 19 Aug 2003 23:00:46 +0000, etherman23 <etherman23@...>
>> In the vast majority of cases, three laryngeals (*h1, *h2, *h3)
>> suffice, and there is little disagreement about which roots contain
>> which laryngeal.
>Probably because these laryngeals are mechanically inserted into the
>> There are also some unresolved issues relating to the voicing andThat's unnecessary. There's enough evidence for laryngeals in IE itself.
>> aspirating effects of laryngeals on neighbouring consonants, and the
>> reflexes of *h3- in Hittite (sometimes h-, sometimes 0-), which I
>> think do point to more than three laryngeals at some stage prior to
>I'd be more likely to accept the laryngeal theory if a solid link
>with PAA could be found
>Incidentally, are there any known languages which have syllabicYes. Carrier, Yi, Tashlhiyt Berber, Bella Coola (the last two even have
>variants of the laryngeals?
>> The labialized laryngeals **/hW/, **/?W/, **/xW/ and **/XW/ allAs I said, for PIE three. Before that, it's speculative. Proto-Nostratic
>> give *h3 (o-colouring), but in Hittite we can perhaps distinguish
>> between those that are reflected as h- (**xW, **XW(?)) and as 0-
>> (**hW, **?W, **XW(?)).
>> "Voicing *h3" would reflect earlier **/?W/ (but, alas, there seem
>> to be no cases of "aspirating *h3" as we would expect in the case
>> of **/hW/, **/xW/ or **/XW/).
>It seems I've lost count somewhere. How many laryngeals (including
>allophones) would you reconstruct?