Re: Glottalic thought-experiments

> >
> > Now isn't it curious that in all these groups the *d series

merged

> with the *dH series, not with the voiceless stops? The traditional
> model of PIE phonology has an answer to this: *d and *dH were

rather

> similar, the former being voiced, the latter breathy-voiced. If the
> original system was simplified, a merger involving the two of them
> (and producing a {t, d} system) was more natural than the merger of
> eithet of them with *t (sure enough, the latter didn't happen
> anywhere). How do you explain the fact that, in terms of your

version

> of the glottalic theory, the unconditional merger of *t and *t' (to
> the exclusion of *d) never occurred, while the falling together of
> *t' and *d was so common?
>

I'll have to think about that.

Gamkrelidze & Ivanov:
On the Reconstruction of PIE Stops
Glottalized Stops in IE
in
Shevorosky and Markey (eds.):
Typology, Relationship and Time
"
The transformation of glottalized consonants into corresponding
voiced stops can be observed in many languages and can be explained
by the very nature of articulation of glottalized consonants, ie.
with complete closure of the glottis.
...
"

I should quote more, but it's rather long. You might want to look it
up yourself.

Torsten