--- In Nostratica@yahoogroups.com, "etherman23" <etherman23@...> wrote:

> My current thinking (which presumes the Glottalic Theory and
> Indo-Tyrrhenian Hypothesis) is that:
> H1 was /S/
> H2 was /h/ or perhaps /x/
> H3 was /?/

> Most unusual is the claim that H1 is /S/. ... In the Finnic

languages *h corresponds

> to *H1 in these words. This would imply that H1 is /h/ however PI
> looks like it already has /h/ known as H2.

But this argument fails if H2 was /x/.

> We should also consider that H1 doesn't
> cause any voicing assimilation.

I thought [h] did not cause voicing assimilation - note the Latinate
words beginning adh-.

Richard.