Grimm’s Law Revisited Caflisch (1990)

See Grimm's law Caflisch 1990.pdf in the files section.

"We (Caflisch) can agree with G (Gessman 1990) that the aspirated
segments cannot be found in other branches, but that Dravidian
languages even today in central and southern India have them; and some
of these, e.g. Kannada, have retroflexed T-series [t, d, n], etc.
After all, perhaps the vaunted romanticism of the Leipzig linguists
should have included retroflex ion in their scheme for the I.E.
segment inventory, but they did not. Connected with G's eight point
(6) is the discussion relevant to possible vs. impossible phonological
paradigmata.
The ninth point suggests a * P. I.E. (= G's "Proto-Aryan") pharyngeal
series in the segment matrix; however I (Caflisch) claim a glottal zed
series proposed also by other scholars such as A. R. Bomhard (1977),
P. Hopper (1977), T. V. Gamkreldize (1975), and L. Hammerich (1967).
One reason for glottalization is rather simple: it can apply only to
voiceless segments which will mean that we can conveniently ||p|| on
both physiological and typological grounds.
Also assumed under the rubric of this ninth point is G's long-held
opinion that the substratum contamination (I prefer to call it
cross-contamination or bilateral contamination) between *P. I.E. and
*P. S. (Proto-Semitic) was most assuredly in force. In this
connection Levin (1971) ought to be consulted and taken seriously.
Could Hittite have been a quasi "buffer" culture between *I.E.
(Hittite, despite G's claims about its amalgam status, continues to be
recognized as *I.E. in structure.) and Semitic? After, all, Slavs
were used by the Roman empire as a buffer culture (a "shock strip")
between the latter and the threatening eastern nomadic tribes
(Caflisch 1990, p. 19)."
"I (Caflisch) agree with G that, most assuredly. Languages are very
easily contaminated through contacts, and even half-hearted
acculturation (a kind of "passive acculturation" where speakers lack
full motivation to assimilate within a cultural base) within G's
substratum and superstratum complexes allows for it to lesser degree
(Caflisch 1990, p.21)."
"In summarizing Gessman's article, I (Caflisch) point to several ideas
which are indeed crucial to his arguments. Fist G, makes the bold
claim against the interpretation of any cycle in Grimm's Law, without
dismissing the actual linear changes that have occurred. G's
longstanding theory of superstrata, adstrata, and substrata in
language contacts and their subsequent tendencies toward contamination
phenomena is indeed well taken here (Caflisch 1990, p. 24)."
Caflisch, J., Sr. (1990). Grimm's law revisited: a case for natural,
typological phonology. Language Quarterly, 28 (3-4), pp. 17-28).