Re: a discussion on OIT

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew Jarrette" <anjarrette@...>
wrote:

>
> Is it correct that the glottalic theory posits the series
> *p-*t-*k/*p'-*t'-*k'/*b-*d-*g (ignoring for the sake of argument
> the palatals and the labiovelars), with *b-*d-*g representing
> the *bh-*dh-*gh of traditional reconstruction? If this is so,
> then the glottalic theory says that voiceless aspirates in Greek
> and proto-Italic come from *b-*d-*g while *p-*t-*k remain

unaspirated.

> This seems incredibly implausible to me, that voiced stops should
> become voiceless aspirates while voiceless stops remain unchanged.

For

> this reason I think the glottalic theory should be relegated to the
> wastebin. The traditional reconstruction aptly explains the

observed

> phonological phenomena and is directly supported by the voiced
> aspirate series in Indic.

The problem is that the traditionally reconstructed sound system
is typologically irregular. Presumedly a voiceless aspirated
row must be present before a whisper-voiced aspirated row can be
added.

See http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pieml/messages/1255?threaded=
1&m=e&var=1&tidx=1 , as well as years of debate on the the topic
in the cybalist archives.

David