--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "squilluncus" <grvs@...> wrote:
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, glen gordon <glengordon01@...> wrote:
> But supposing glottalization or other strengthening of articulation
> (p:) having developed from a previous state of the series, and,
> thereby eliminating the sound that would have been initial /b/, would
> this have left an empty gap in the series?
> Are other candidates to be considered instead of h3?
> h1 = glottal stop?
> Has this previous history of the medial series been taken into account
> by those trying to link PIE to Kartvelian, Inuit, Etruscan?
> That is: have you been looking for a labial stop in correspondencies?
There are plenty of possibilities for what might have happened to
cause a gap where PIE *b is expected. For example, if the potentially
ancestral sound was implosive or PRE-glottalised, it could have merged
with *m. This happened in the development of Shan. In Shan the
implosive/pre-glottalised dental merged with *l and its tempting to
compare the d > l changes in Latin. However, I think they're probably
just a coincidence.
Another possibility based on the idea of an implosive consonant, which
I can't defend so well, is that *bH and potential future *b simply
merged - [b] has a tendency to implosiveness.
A third idea proposed is that *w and potential future *b merged. I
didn't see any good arguments proposed against this when it was proposed.
I am not aware of any bright ideas appearing from Nostratic comparisons.
Richard.