--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:
> >Is it possible to have a quick update on the main points (e.g. what
about
> >poculum and pabulum)?
>
> Apparently not. OK, then I'm forced to ask a number of potentially
stupid
> questions.
Have a heart, Miguel. I've got some packing to do and a train to catch
:-). I was also hoping Jens would speak first, since he might be able
to convey the latest pers.comm. from Birgit Olsen herself.
All right. The idea is, briefly, that stops had aspirated variants
after the consonantal allophones of *h1 and *h2 (but not *h3), e.g.
*sjuh1-tlah2 > *sju:tHla: > Lat. su:bula 'awl', *pah2-tlom >
*pa:tHlom > Lat. pa:bulum, but *poh3-tlom > *po:tlom > Lat. po:culum.
Apart from this culum-bulum variation in Latin, the proposed rule
accounts for some relict forms like Lat. verbum (if < *wr.h1-to-),
ple:bs, Gk. ple:tHu:s (if < *pleh1-tu-), or Skt. ti:rtHa- 'passage,
road, ford' = Lith. ti`ltas 'bridge' < *tl.h2-to-.
> Calvert Watkins in Ramat & Ramat points to Bartholomae's law as the
culprit
> for the variation *t ~ *dh in the suffix under discussion. I think
that's
> an excellent idea.
I'm not sure whose idea it was originally. Something of the kind was
certainly advocated by Kurylowicz (that's probably where Watkins had
it from). The problem is that we don't find *dH where expected -- but
then, Olsen's Law can be interpreted as a PIE precursor of
Bartholomae's Law. It's very much the same thing -- aspiration by
progressive assimilation.
Piotr