Re: Indo-Uralic?

Arnaud, when would you time the development of PIE glottalized stops and
affricates to voiced stops and affricates?

Patrick
==============

I consider PIE inherited voiced *and* post-glottalized.

I have studied which IE languages had pre-glottalized
which had post-glottalized.
To study that, I looked for cases of roots where ?+Cunvoiced
could have fused together to produce a voiced "in surface".

My conclusion which I have already given :

Western PIE remained post-glottalized
In western PIE, e.g. celtic, ? + C > -CC-
But Latin does not follow that
but osco-umbrian does.

Eastern PIE became pre-glottalized
Germanic sides with that.
As a result of this : ?+C is the same as C+voice.
A major isogloss of PIE.

Many alternations ag / ak are due to ?-k
being treated differently by eastern and western PIE.

Example :
LAtin ful-K-rum
Grec phalan-g-s
Germanic Bal-k-on < *bul-g-

Now when it comes to Russian brezg previously discuted,
the root is according to me the same as in Arabic wa-bas?-

Hence from b_s? > bres?-k > bres-?k- > brezg
Sometimes s? (=H2.6) remains because of
phonotactic complications.

Arnaud