30-08-03 00:49, Richard Wordingham wrote:
> I don't know what *dentu- is extracted from, so I can't comment on
> that aspect. As to the phonetics, I'm surmising a development as in
> Albanian, g^ > ð, though it could also be an affricate; I'm not sure
> how, for example, /dz/ would have been rendered in Greek. I don't
> like the voicing, but I don't think it's impossible. For example,
> the palatals could heve become fricatives before a Grimm's law shift
> in Thracian. I'd prefer to see more parallels.
>
> As to the stem, well Gothic has _tunþus_ for 'tooth', so I don't see
> any problem with the ending.
In my opinion, "Grimm's Law" in Thracian is a myth. What we have good
evidence for is the aspirated pronunciation of voiceless stops,
especially of /t/, written <tH> in Greek sources. The aspiration of /p/
and /k/ is marked only occasionally, which may mean that it weak in
comparison with that of Gk. <pH> and <kH>. Interestingly, Thracian /p/
could be be used to substitute Gk. <pH> (<pulpu-> for <pHilippo->).
There are quite a few Thracian onomastic elements with initial <p->
(recorded with Gk. <p>) plausibly assigned to etyma with PIE *p (not *b,
of course).
It seems to me that the plain and aspirated voiced rows simply fell
together in Thracian, as they did in Celtic or Albanian. Additionally,
PIE *w became Thr. <b>. Quite possibly the Thr. /b, d, g/ series had
fricative allophones as in Spanish, Proto-Germanic or post-Classical
Greek; that would have made the *w/*b(H) merger more natural.
The Thracian reflexes of *k^ and *g^(H) are spelt <s> and <z> (zeta);
their probable phonetic values are /s/ and /z/. As opposed to Albanian
and Armenian, which have special developments of *k^w, Thracian shows
simply <sb> ~ <zb>, as supposedly in the 'horse' word.
Piotr