From: fournet.arnaud
Message: 55592
Date: 2008-03-21
----- Original Message -----
From: Patrick Ryan
> >Interesting that you say "at least some (or most? or all?) of the
> >time". I've been thinking along those lines myself. We distinguish
> >the laryngeals by their vowel colouring and vocalic reflexes in Greek,
> >mainly, but that doesn't mean that every laryngeal that gave /e/ in
> >Greek must have come from the same unitary PIE laryngeal phoneme. In
> >the case of *h1, I agree that some, or most of the time, we're dealing
> >with /h/: (some) *h1('s) aspirate(s) a following or preceding stop,
> >some *h1's give /h-/ in Armenian and Albanian. On the other hand, *h1
> >must sometimes have been a simple glottal stop /?/: I believe a root
> >like *h1es- "to be" is more likely to have been /?es-/ than /hes-/ (I
> >mean, maybe it was */hes-/, but I don't think it's likely that *all*
> >roots beginning with *h1V- had /h/).
Miguel
***
I think you are probably on the right track here but, I think, we must hold
open the possibility that Anatolian had /?/ <Ø> and /h/ <h> while
non-Anatolian had only /h/ <*H>.
Patrick
***
In favor of Baltic preserving laryngeals long enough
to permit Hirt's law to exist,
you have Aikio substrate words :
ha'lpi = a'llap "snow Bunting"
From Pok 30 Hel "white".
ha'vda "eider" < *H2_w "bird"
jewda-h- young swan < -eH2
halpi conflicts with the idea
that Hittite alpa "cloud" is the same
as "white"
Another puzzling fact is initial #h-
in Latin in haud in ex-h-aurio
Supposedly a pedantic irrelevant -h-,
It occurs only when H2 is *?
This suggest some varieties of LAtin
still had *? versus *& contrast,
at least at the initial of the word.
Arnaud
===============
> >As to *h3, I don't think /G/ is very likely. At least in late PIE, I
> >think there were no voiced fricatives. Earlier voiced *z, as in the
> >nom.sg. which lengthens the thematic vowel, later merged with *s, so
> >it's very unlikely that *G, if it ever existed, did not merge with *x
> >(*G is usually the first voiced fricative to go, cf. Dutch). Also, a
> >voiced velar fricative does not explain the o-colouring, so we should
> >at least have /Gw/, and that would be strange indeed, to have /Gw/
> >without /G/.
***
I do not believe that PIE had *z any more than it had *f, *G, or *x.
It had only *w and *s.
Patrick
***
I agree there was no *f.
*z * G *x *H existed.
Arnaud
=========