> Lately I've been giving thought to the PIE stop system and I've found
> the proposals I've seen rather unsatisfactory. The Traditional T, D, DH
etc. system is the most in agreement with the comparative data,
> but it's typologically unacceptable.
On the traditional system, we have to posit phonological changes in the stop
system for quite a number of branches. This might well indicate inherent
instability in the system. So the fact that */T D DH/ is virtually
unparalleled perhaps need not worry us as much as it does.
>We could add aspirated unvoiced stops ... The Glottalic theory
I agree with you. Both of these were good attempts, but have not persuaded
linguists (or me). Nice tries, but there is too much evidence against them.
> I would reinterpret */T D DH/ as */TH T D/.
Yes it has been thought of before. But there are problems.
Only Germanic allows an aspirated or affricate reflex of the traditional *T.
Most languages which retain voiced consonants show voicing for the reflex of
traditional *D. The exceptions are Armenian and Germanic. There are also
indirect indications which are difficult to explain away.
Traditional *Dh etc seems to require voicing in all languages that keep
voiced consonants, and seems to require aspiration in Latin, Greek and
Sanskrit.
Anything is of course possible, but the problems are not as easily disposed
of as you suggest.
Peter