Re: a discussion on OIT

At 3:38:15 PM on Sunday, May 25, 2008, david_russell_watson
wrote:

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

[...]

>> 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.

Only if you think that a strict typological universal is
involved, which seems to me to require a leap of faith. In
any case the glottalic theory seems to create more
difficulties than it solves. Breathy-voiced (e.g., *dH) vs.
stiff or creaky voiced (e.g., *d) seems a distinctly better
bet, especially since such oppositions are attested.

Brian