Re: IE *p and *b

>
> The difference is minimal, anyway (by [P] I mean the bilabial
> fricative). Some authors regard the outcome of *sp in Celtic as

*/sb/ in

> phonemic terms, whatever the precise realisation. We find -p- > -b-
> medially before liquids and archaic spellings suggest something like
> bl-/Bl-/wl- as the intermediate stage between *pl- and l- at least

in

> Celtiberian, cf. Bletisama ~ Lataisama < *pleth2-ism.h2-o- (the

ancient

> name of Ledesma, Spain).
>
> Piotr
>

Ok, and now you came back to my initial point. if /b/ was [w] in IE
(as they seem to suggest) and we have Celtic evidence that /p/ was
very likely [P] (bilabial fricative) in the first place, then why
can't we suppose that there were no [b] and [p] in IE at all, just [w]
and [P]?