> Another possiblity here is the much-hated h4. If h3/h4 fell
together after
> the pre-hittite IE group had left, it would not be all that
strange to see
> h3 go one way (hittite h) while h4 go the other (and disappear).
However in
> the IE speakers, h3/h4 -> h3 initially would explain the presense
of only
> initial h3 in PIE.
>
I do not know very much about the finer details of the Hettite
evidence for several laryngeals, so what follows is only some
philosofical considerations:
I think more than 3 laeyngeals seem probable because this fits well
into the phonological system of early IE. To make the system
complete, there should be one unvoised and one voised spirant for
each articulatory place.
You have the following stops: p,ph,bh - t,th,dh - k,kh,gh -kW,kWh,k
In a language with these stop series, the following spirants seem
very probable f,v - s,z - x,Y - xw,Yw (y denoting velar voised sp.)
In addition the h is a very probable phoneme for languages having
aspirated stops, and the glottal stop ? complete the picture by
being the clusile counterpart of h.
f,v did not existe. z may have been there, but fallen together with
s.
Then we have left these 6 probable spirants and one stop that should
have been there: x,Y,xw,Yw,h,?
That is: You have 6 probable sounds that could be the laryngeals
treated in the theory.
Tu asume at leat 4 laryngeal existed, is therefor not to overstretch
the theory, if this can explain historical facts.