Re: [tied] Suffixes and the Glottalic Theory

On Wed, 04 Dec 2002 02:46:51 +0000, "Glen Gordon"
<glengordon01@...> wrote:

>Things are happier once we first realize that IE never had
>ejectives. At best, fortis and lenis stops. The voicing of
>fortis stops occured late in IE (in the last 1000 years of
>its development). Pronominal neuter singular *-d as well
>as ablative singular *-d were once fortis stops, not ejectives
>and the neuter only developed in the Late IE period anyways
>via the clipping of a suffixed inanimate demonstrative *-t&
>to *-t: (and then to voiced *-d). The ablative was once *-ate
>with plain voiceless *t.

I still have no idea what you mean by fortis. We have three kinds of
consonants (*t *d *dh), so you need at least two features to
distinguish them. If *d was "fortis", was that in opposition to *dh
or *t or both? What was the other feature? If *d was fortis [tt] and
*t was [t], how come it was *d that became voiced (it should have been
*t!).

=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...